Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Asberry v. Payne

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1998No. 97-1915PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Per curiam

Asberry asserts in her sole proposition of law that she is entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel the appointment of counsel for her in her juvenile court custody proceeding. In order to be entitled to the writ, Asberry must establish that she has a clear legal right to the appointment of counsel, that Judge Payne has a clear legal duty to appoint counsel for her, and that she has no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. See State ex rel. Howard v. Ferreri (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 587, 589, 639 N.E.2d 1189, 1192-1193.

Although the United States Constitution does not require the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Howard v. FerreriOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Herman v. KlopfleischOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Keenan v. CalabreseOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State ex rel. Purdy v. Clermont County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. In re C.S.Ohio Supreme Court · 2007
  2. State v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  3. In re WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. In Re Brooks, Unpublished Decision (7-22-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. State ex rel. Thompson v. SponOhio Supreme Court · 1998

34 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