Legal Opinion
State v. Hayden
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided August 28, 2002No. 2000-1997PublishedCited by 94 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 96 Ohio St.3d 211.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. HAYDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Hayden,
2002-Ohio-4169.] Criminal law—Sex offenders—Confrontation Clauses of Sixth Amendment to United States Constitution and Section 10, Article I of the Ohio Constitution do not apply to R.C. Chapter 2950—Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution do not require that trial court conduct a hearing to determine whether a defendant is a sexually oriented…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by94 opinions
- State v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. HudsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
- State v. Mole (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. CowanOhio Supreme Court · 2004
89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.