Search for: "D. R.C. D."
Results 261 - 280
of 305
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2010, 1:09 am
The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled today that the preadoption placement procedures for “private” adoptions set forth in R.C. 5103.16(D) must be followed even in cases where the child has been living with the prospective adoptive parents pursuant to an award of legal custody by a juvenile court. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 2:39 pm
Supp. 2d 863 (D. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 12:00 am
P. 25.2(d). [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 12:00 am
DAVIS Richard D. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 12:00 am
DAVIS Richard D. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 10:33 am
Jenney, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-2420, issued a 5-1 decision stating that "a police officer's unaided visual estimation of a vehicle's speed is sufficient evidence to support a conviction for speeding in violation of R.C. 4511.21(D) without independent verification of the vehicle's speed if the officer is trained, certified, and experienced in visually estimating vehicle speed. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 12:00 am
SMITH Defendant-appellant Allen Smith appeals from his conviction after the trial court found him guilty of failure to verify his current residence, in violation of R.C. 2950.06(F). [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 9:14 pm
LEXIS 2068; 2010 Ohio 2544 (Ohio 12th App 6/7/2010) “Because the requirements of R.C. 2953.23 were mandatory, the trial court did not have the discretion to consider a second, successive petition for postconviction relief that did not satisfy those requirements. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 1:33 pm
Ohio's highest court resolved conflicting state court decisions without batting an eye: We hold that a police officer’s unaided visual estimation of a vehicle’s speed, by itself, is sufficient to support a conviction for violation of R.C. 4511.21 (D) without independent verification of the vehicles speed if the officer is trained, is certified by the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy or a similar organization…and is experienced in visually estimating… [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 1:33 pm
Ohio's highest court resolved conflicting state court decisions without batting an eye: We hold that a police officer’s unaided visual estimation of a vehicle’s speed, by itself, is sufficient to support a conviction for violation of R.C. 4511.21 (D) without independent verification of the vehicles speed if the officer is trained, is certified by the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy or a similar organization…and is experienced in visually estimating… [read post]
24 May 2010, 9:10 pm
As Shari Allison notes over at the Federal Defender’s Tenth Circuit blog noting that on the way to holding that the state “courts and the district court failed to properly apply Beck [that] [d]epraved-mind second-degree murder was and now is a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder under Oklahoma law (the Tenth spends some time on the meanderings of the OK courts on this issue). [read post]
4 May 2010, 1:08 pm
They told him that even though what he did wasn't the crime he was convicted of, and even though he'd made that very argument, he couldn't get the benefit of it because they're decision (that he was innocent) came after he'd made the argument rather than before.If only they'd decided before he was tried, it would have been fine. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 8:52 am
R.C. 4511.19(D)(4)(b). [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 4:27 pm
Burglary is a either a second or third degree crime, depending on the factors described below. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 7:50 am
The blood sample was not analyzed in accordance with paragraph (D) of O.A.C. 3701-53-06 pursuant to O.A.C. 3701-53-05 (E). [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 10:42 am
Joseph D. [read post]
Township Trustees Are Not 'Party' With Legal Standing to File Mandamus Action Challenging Annexation
30 Jan 2010, 8:05 am
In a decision announced today, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that by filing objections with county commissioners to an annexation petition pursuant to R.C. 709.023(D), a board of township trustees does not gain legal standing to later file a mandamus action challenging the commissioners’ approval of the requested annexation. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 3:42 am
I did see an announcement from the court that they’d given the parties in Turner v. [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 12:46 pm
The Supreme Court of Ohio ruled today that R.C. 2953.08(D)(1), which bars a criminal defendant from appealing a jointly recommended sentence that is “authorized by law,” does not bar appellate review in cases where the sentence imposed by a trial court is contrary to a mandatory provision of the state’s criminal sentencing statutes. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 5:48 am
See Ohio R.C. [read post]
