Opinion

State v. Hull

1994 Ohio LEXIS 3004 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1994

Full text

The State of Ohio v. Hull

Per Curiam. The motion to supplement the record is denied, and the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion. Judgment affirmed. Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
Cluster ID: 6878250

Citations

1994 Ohio LEXIS 3004
71 Ohio St. 3d 292
643 N.E.2d 546

Cited by

State v. McNeal, Unpublished Decision (9-10-2002)
Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 10, 2002
State v. Wheatt, Unpublished Decision (1-31-2002)
Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 2002
State v. Northern, Unpublished Decision (12-26-2001)
Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 26, 2001
State v. Williams, Unpublished Decision (9-17-2001)
Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2001
State v. Walker, Unpublished Decision (6-20-2000)
Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 2000
State v. Lopez, Unpublished Decision (5-11-2000)
Ohio Court of Appeals · May 11, 2000

Parentheticals

No parentheticals returned.