Legal Opinion

State v. D'Ambrosio

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 25, 1993No. 90-2236PublishedCited by 215 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtA. William Sweeney, J.

Pursuant to R.C. 2929.05(A), this court is required to undertake a three-prong analysis in reviewing the instant death penalty case. We will first consider the specific issues raised by defendant with respect to the proceedings below. We will review all of defendant’s propositions of law, even *188though some may be deemed to have been waived, since they were not raised below.

In his first proposition of law, defendant-appellant, Joseph D’Ambrosio, contends that one member of the three-judge panel, Judge Michael J. Corrigan, was biased, inasmuch as he had presided over the murder trial of Keenan.…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. State v. DehassOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. State v. LongOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  4. State v. MaurerOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. State v. SteffenOhio Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by215 opinions

  1. State v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State v. TreeshOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. DennisOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. LangOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. CampbellOhio Supreme Court · 2000

210 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