Legal Opinion

State v. Pepka

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 25, 2010No. 2009-0678PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.

{¶ 1} Pursuant to Crim.R. 7(D), a court may amend an indictment at any time provided that the amendment does not change the name or identity of the crime charged. We are called upon to determine whether amending an indictment that charges a defendant with endangering children in violation of R.C. 2919.22(A) as a third-degree felony to add language that the victim suffered serious physical harm impermissibly changes the name or identity of the offense. We hold that it does not.

{¶ 2} Pursuant to the Ohio Revised Code, the only circumstance in which child endangering in violation of R.C.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hamling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. State v. SkatzesOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  3. State v. HeadleyOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. State v. O'BrienOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State v. ChildsOhio Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. MaxwellOhio Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. BrunningOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  3. State v. TroisiOhio Supreme Court · 2022
  4. State v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  5. State v. WhiteheadOhio Court of Appeals · 2022

17 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