Legal Opinion
State v. Uskert
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 2, 1999No. 1998-0217PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 85 Ohio St.3d 593.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. USKERT, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Uskert,
1999-Ohio-289.] Criminal law—Motor vehicles—Traffic offenses—Driving while intoxicated— Administrative license suspension—Reinstatement fee of former R.C. 4511.191(L)(2) does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. The reinstatement fee of former R.C. 4511.191(L)(2) does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Section 10, Article I of the Ohio Constitution. (No. 98-217—Submitted…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dayton v. GalluzzoOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. Gorham, Ca2006-08-195 (11-13-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- State v. MooreOhio Court of Appeals · 2024