Legal Opinion

State v. Atkinson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 10, 1965No. 39255PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerbert, J.

The question here is whether the indictment may withstand defendant’s motion attacking its validity.

Section 2941.04 of the Revised Code, in part, sets out in clear and unambiguous language the limitations upon the charging of two or more different offenses in an indictment, as follows :

“An indictment or information may charge two or more different offenses connected together in their commission, or different statements of the same offense, or two or more different offenses of the same class of crimes or offenses, under separate counts, and if two or more indictments or informations are filed…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Commonwealth v. Phoenix Amusement Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. Ford (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  2. State v. KennedyOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. State v. MinnekerOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  4. State v. RosemondOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
  5. State v. Schandel, 07-Ca-848 (12-4-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008

3 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