Legal Opinion
State v. Phipps
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 6, 1979No. 78-554PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.
The state presents two propositions of law concerning the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution for consideration in this cause. In part I, infra, the state argues that R. C. 2907.07-(B) does not violate the Due Process Clause; that is to say, the -state maintains that the statute is not void for vagueness, and, therefore provides adequate notice of what is proscribed. In part II, infra, the state contends that R. C. 2907.07(B) is not overbroad in violation of the Freedom of Soeeeh Clause.
1..The Court of Appeals found R. Cj 2907.07(B) to be vague because the…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Cantwell v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. YoungOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- Leichtman v. Wlw Jacor Communications, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
- State v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. WearOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.