Legal Opinion
State v. Romage
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 6, 2014No. 2012-1958 and 2012-2042PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[Cite as State v. Romage, 138 Ohio St.3d 390,
2014-Ohio-783.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. ROMAGE, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Romage, 138 Ohio St.3d 390,
2014-Ohio-783.] Ohio’s child-enticement statute, R.C. 2905.05(A), is unconstitutionally overbroad. (Nos. 2012-1958 and 2012-2042—Submitted October 9, 2013—Decided March 6, 2014.) APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 11AP-822,
2012-Ohio-3381. ____________________ SYLLABUS OF THE COURT Ohio’s child-enticement statute, R.C. 2905.05(A), is unconstitutionally overbroad because it sweeps within its…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for VincentSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- City of Houston v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. GuytonOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
- League of Women Voters of Ohio v. Ohio Redistricting Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2022