Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Cincinnati Post v. Court of Common Pleas

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 1991No. 90-1923PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

In this action, the Post challenges the constitutionality of the trial judge’s post-verdict order that “[n]o one is to talk to the jurors about the case, and the jurors aren’t to talk to anybody about it.” We conclude that, while a more narrowly focused order might have been constitutional, this one violates the First Amendment.

I

Federal courts have struck down similar post-verdict orders on First Amendment grounds. Such a case was United States v. Sherman (C.A. 9, 1978), 581 F. 2d 1358, in which a trial court “forbade the jurors from discussing the case further with anyone * * * and * * *…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Bantam Books, Inc. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Tanner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  5. State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. SoloveOhio Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publishing Co. v. BondOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Payne v. MuskegonMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Thomas v. McGinty (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Rheinecker v. Forest LaboratoriesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1993
  5. State Ex Rel. Butterbaugh v. Ross County Board of CommissionersOhio Court of Appeals · 1992

3 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