State v. Wright

764 N.E.2d 1035, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1504, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 693
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 20, 2002·No. 02-234·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Washington App. No. 00CA39. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Entry on Application to Certify dated January 28, 2002:

“[W]e find that our decision and judgment presents an actual conflict based upon the same question' that was involved in the Twelfth District’s decision and judgment. In [State d.] Henderson [(1991), 76 Ohio App.3d 290, 601 N.E.2d 596], the court concluded that a victim’s uncorroborated allegations of sexual abuse did not fulfill the substantial proof requirement that the defendant committed other similar crimes. In [the case sub judice], we determined that a victim’s uncorroborated allegation of prior sexual abuse was admissible. Thus, we declined to follow Henderson.

“Accordingly, we grant appellant’s motion to certify this matter to the Ohio Supreme Court for [1505] review and final determination.”

Douglas and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.

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

State v. Wright, 764 N.E.2d 1035, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1504, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 693 (Ohio 2002).

764 N.E.2d 1035 (State v. Wright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Burden
2013 Ohio 1628 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2013)