State v. Barker
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.
I
Two issues are before this court for review. The first is whether R.C. 1531.20, construed in pari materia with R.C. 1533.161, contemplates the forfeiture of an automobile under the general language of “or other device.” We hold it does. The second issue is whether such forfeiture complies with the constraints of due process under the state and federal Constitutions. We hold the forfeiture to be in compliance with due process of law.
This is a case of statutory interpretation. The parties concede that R.C. 1531.201 and 1533.1612 must be construed in pari materia. The locus of contention is the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Van Oster v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Oliver v. Kaiser Community Health FoundationOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. LilliockOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Henry v. Central National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pharr v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1984
- McCloud v. NimmerOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
- State v. ParrishOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. PrescottOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- State Ex Rel. Barno v. Crestwood Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1998