Legal Opinion

State v. Palmer

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 21, 2012No. 2010-1660PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcGee Brown, J.

{¶ 1} This appeal draws us to two procedural questions that linger after our decisions in State v. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266, 2010-Ohio-2424, 933 N.E.2d 753, and State v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374, 952 N.E.2d 1108, each of which invalidated certain aspects of the Adam Walsh Act.

{¶ 2} First, we review whether our decision in Bodyke invalidated the statutory petition process for challenging a classification under the Adam Walsh Act. It did not. Bodyke invalidated the reclassification provisions of the Adam Walsh Act because they violated Ohio’s separation-of-powers doctrine.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. FosterOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State v. BodykeOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  4. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. BloomerOhio Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. State v. FieldsOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  2. State v. D.S.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. State v. ButteryOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  4. State v. SwazeyOhio Supreme Court · 2023
  5. State v. ThornsburyOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

38 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