Home/Ohio Supreme Court/State v. Tuttle

State v. Tuttle

104 Ohio St. 3d 242
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 8, 2004
DocketNo. 2003-0573
StatusPublished

This text of 104 Ohio St. 3d 242 (State v. Tuttle) 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. Tuttle, 104 Ohio St. 3d 242 (Ohio 2004).

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of State v. Thompson, 102 Ohio St.3d 287, 2004-Ohio-2946, 809 N.E.2d 1134, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for consideration of appellant’s [243]*243remaining assignments of error and further action not inconsistent with State v. Thompson.

William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Jon W. Oebker, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant. Richard Agopian, for appellee. Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur. F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.

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

Related

State v. Thompson
809 N.E.2d 1134 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
104 Ohio St. 3d 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-tuttle-ohio-2004.