Legal Opinion

State v. Berry

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1997No. 93-2592PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Per curiam

We have reviewed the record and considered the arguments of the state and the Public Defender. Based on our review, we find that Berry is competent to forgo all further reviews of his conviction and sentence.

I. Jurisdiction

The Public Defender argues that the Ohio Constitution gives us no jurisdiction to determine Berry’s competence. Section 2(B)(1)(f), Article IV, Ohio Constitution, grants this court original jurisdiction “[i]n any cause on review as may be necessary to its complete determination.” However, the Public Defender argues that, because this court has decided Berry’s direct appeal,…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Jones v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Engle v. IsaacSupreme Court of the United States · 1982

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. CowansOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Jennie Franklin and Elaine Quigley, on Behalf of Wilford Lee Berry, Jr. v. Rodney L. Francis, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  3. State v. AshworthOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. Lawson (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2021

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API