State v. Loudermilk
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Miller, Judge.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Michael Loudermilk was charged under R.C. 2907.09(A)(1) with public indecency involving a minor. We hold: (1) "physical proximity" as used in R.C. 2907.09(A)(1) means the victim is near enough to observe the offender's private parts; (2) a criminal defendant is not required to disclose evidence used only for the purpose of impeaching a witness; and (3) intermediate appellate courts have jurisdiction to review a claim of judicial bias that is alleged to result in the violation of a defendant's due process rights.
{¶ 2} Loudermilk, shirtless and in blue…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. DehassOhio Supreme Court · 1967
- State v. BarnesOhio Supreme Court · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- King v. DivokyOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
- Fifth Third Mtge. Co. v. BermanOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
- In re C.S.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2023
- State v. GreenwayOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- State v. CarterOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.