Legal Opinion

Layne v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 2002No. 2001-1253PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 97 Ohio St.3d 456.] LAYNE, APPELLANT, v. OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY, APPELLEE, ET AL. HOUSTON, APPELLANT, v. WILKINSON ET AL., APPELLEES. LEE, APPELLEE, v. OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY, APPELLANT, ET AL. [Cite as Layne v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.,

2002-Ohio-6719.] Criminal procedure—Parole—In any parole determination involving indeterminate sentencing, the Ohio Adult Parole Authority must assign an inmate the offense category score that corresponds to the offense or offenses of conviction. (Nos. 2001-1253, 2001-1266, 2001-1443, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Layne v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State ex rel. Lipschutz v. Shoemaker, Director, Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Hemphill v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. State v. ClarkOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State ex rel. Keith v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  3. State v. RatliffOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  4. State v. EatonOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  5. State ex rel. Bailey v. Parole Bd. (Slip Opinions)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017

49 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