Legal Opinion

State v. Johnson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 2000No. 98-1333PublishedCited by 138 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.

Appellant advances twenty-nine propositions of law for our consideration. (See Appendix.) We have carefully considered each of appellant’s propositions of law and have reviewed the death sentence for appropriateness and proportionality. For the reasons that follow, we uphold appellant’s convictions and sentences, including the sentence of death.

*102I

It is well settled that this court is not required to address and discuss, in opinion form, each and every contention raised by the parties in a death penalty appeal. See, e.g., State v. Scudder (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 263, 267, 643 N.E.2d 524, 528; and…

2Cases cited56 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. BradleyOhio Supreme Court · 1989

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

3Cited by138 opinions

  1. State v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State v. TibbettsOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. Dean (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2015
  4. State v. ColeyOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. State v. BryanOhio Supreme Court · 2004

133 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