Legal Opinion
State v. Bell
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 22, 1976No. 76-499PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPaul W. Brown, J.
Appellant Bell raises ten propositions of law. The first three of these assert that Ohio’s statutory scheme for the imposition of the death penalty is unconstitutional. That issue was decided by this court in State v. Bayless (1976), 48 Ohio St. 2d 73, and need not be reconsidered here. Those propositions of law are overruled.
Appellant asserts in his fourth proposition of law that *275he was unconstitutionally coerced into waiving his right to trial by jury by the provisions of R. C. 2929.03(C)(1), (2) and (E) which provide that if a defendant is tried, by jury and convicted, then the trier of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Williams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- United States v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Haley v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- State v. BaylessOhio Supreme Court · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- State v. GarnerOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. WadeOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. BarkerOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Commonwealth v. MoodySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.