State v. Smith , 99 Ohio St. 3d 140 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  • {¶ 1} Propositions of Law Nos. II through VI are dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently allowed.

    {¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on Proposition of Law No. I on the authority of State v. Fisher, 99 Ohio St.3d 127, 2003-Ohio-2761, 789 N.E.2d 222.

    William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Renee L. Snow, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Robert L. Tobik, Cuyahoga County Public Defender, and John T. Martin, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and O’Con-nor, JJ., concur. Cook, J., not participating.

Document Info

Docket Number: Nos. 2002-1093 and 2002-1220

Citation Numbers: 99 Ohio St. 3d 140

Judges: Con, Cook, Moyer, Nor, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

Filed Date: 6/11/2003

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/21/2022