Legal Opinion

State v. Perkins

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1985No. 84-1490PublishedCited by 82 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

Since the trial court’s ruling on the motion to suppress in the case sub judice, the Supreme Court has adopted the ultimate or inevitable discovery exception to the Exclusionary Rule in Nix v. Williams (1984),_U.S--- 81 L. Ed. 2d 377. The prosecuting attorney herein, on behalf of the state of Ohio, petitions this court to recognize the exception and hold it applicable to the facts before us. While a majority of the appellate court below failed to address the Nix holding, we believe the prosecutor’s request is warranted under the facts as presented.

The Exclusionary Rule has historically…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by82 opinions

  1. State v. Banks-HarveyOhio Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State v. FlippoWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State v. KinleyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State v. PorterOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. State v. SharpeOhio Court of Appeals · 2008

77 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