Legal Opinion

State v. Schultz

Toledo Municipal Court

Decided May 20, 1964No. T 324988PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKiroff, J.

The defendant herein was charged by affidavit with the violation of Section 4511.251, Revised Code.

To this affidavit the defendant filed a motion to quash, which was overruled, and then the defendant filed a demurrer alleging substantially as follows:

1. That the facts stated in the affidavit do not constitute an offense punishable by the law of the State of Ohio.

2. That intent is not alleged therein, proof of such intent being necessary to make out the offense charged.

3. That Section 4511.251, Revised Code, is unconstitutional because it deprives the accused of the presumption of innocence…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mobile, Jackson & Kansas City Railroad v. TurnipseedSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Ferry v. RamseySupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. Tenhunfeld v. Parkway Taxi Cab Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1957
  4. Robrock v. RobrockOhio Court of Appeals · 1956

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Stuebgen v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. DempseyOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. State v. GoodmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1966
  4. State v. SmithFremont Municipal Court · 1966
  5. State v. Nedelkoff, Columbiana County Courts, Ohio1970

5 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