Home/Ohio Supreme Court/State v. Wogenstahl

State v. Wogenstahl

664 N.E.2d 948, 75 Ohio St. 3d 1492
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Wogenstahl. Read the opinion of the Court — 75 Ohio St. 3d 344 →
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 22, 1996·No. 95-42·Published

Opinion

Hamilton County, No. C-930222. UPON CONSIDERATION of the motion filed by counsel for appellant to stay the execution of sentence in the above-styled cause pending the timely filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States,

IT IS ORDERED that said motion be, and the same is hereby, granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the compliance with the mandate and the execution of sentence be, and the same are hereby, stayed pending the timely filing of the petition in the Supreme Court of the United States.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if such petition is timely filed, this stay shall continue for an indefinite period pending final disposition of this cause by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., would grant for one hundred eighty days after entry of this decision.

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

State v. Wogenstahl, 664 N.E.2d 948, 75 Ohio St. 3d 1492 (Ohio 1996).

664 N.E.2d 948 (State v. Wogenstahl) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.