State v. Tanner

Ohio Supreme Court

State v. Tanner

737 N.E.2d 51, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1446, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 2691

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 23, 2000

Docket00-1859

StatusPublished

This text of 737 N.E.2d 51 (State v. Tanner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Tanner, 737 N.E.2d 51, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1446, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 2691 (Ohio 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Richland App. No. 98CA282. Appellant has filed a motion for delayed appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Richland County denying his application for reopening. Whereas S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(4)(b) prescribes that the provision for delayed appeal does not apply to appeals involving post-conviction relief, including appeals of applications for reopening brought pursuant to App.R. 26(B),

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that this case be, and hereby is, dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Richland App. No. 98CA282. Appellant has filed a motion for delayed appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Richland County denying his application for reopening. Whereas S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(4)(b) prescribes that the provision for delayed appeal does not apply to appeals involving post-conviction relief, including appeals of applications for reopening brought pursuant to App.R. 26(B),

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that this case be, and hereby is, dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

737 N.E.2d 51, 90 Ohio St. 3d 1446, 2000 Ohio LEXIS 2691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-tanner-ohio-2000.