Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Arnold (Slip Opinion)

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 2016No. 2014-0718Published

1DissentO’Neill, J.

{¶ 91} Respectfully, I must dissent.

{¶ 92} I agree that with regard to Lester’s Fifth Amendment claims, the “record before us does not reflect an ideal inquiry by the trial court.” Lead opinion at ¶ 48. However, this matter presents a good opportunity to explain the duty of a trial court to take affirmative steps to determine the validity of the Fifth Amendment claims of any witness. Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486-487, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951); United States v. Melchor Moreno, 536 F.2d 1042, 1046 (5th Cir.1976). If the trial court had simply taken Lester aside and had a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  2. Couch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. State v. LytleOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Bellis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. State v. PostOhio Supreme Court · 1987

5 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