State v. Withers
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellant contends, in his first of four propositions of law, that “he was effectively denied the assistance of counsel” at the preliminary hearing, in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Based on the record before us, we agree with the courts below that nothing occurred at appellant’s preliminary hearing which was prejudicial to his rights. See State v. Childs (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 56; Chapman v. California (1967), 386 U. S. 18; Coleman v. Alabama (1970), 399 U. S. 1.
In his second and third propositions of law, appellant *55argues that the trial court…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Coleman v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Ohio v. HymoreOhio Supreme Court · 1967
- State v. ChildsOhio Supreme Court · 1968
3Cited by18 opinions
- Krischbaum v. DillonOhio Supreme Court · 1991
- Dipietro v. DipietroOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
- Silver v. Jewish Home of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Walker v. HollandOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
- State v. BelcherOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.