Legal Opinion
State v. Hill
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided May 8, 1998No. C.A. Case No. 16126. T.C. Case No. 95 CR 3213PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Frederick N. Young, Presiding Judge.
The state appeals the trial court’s grant of James Hill, Jr.’s motion to suppress. Having found that the trial court erred in suppressing the evidence, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this action to the trial court.
I
Hill was placed on parole in April 1995. Hill’s parole was subject to terms and conditions established by the Montgomery County Adult Parole Authority. At the time he was placed on parole, Hill signed a document entitled “Conditions of Supervision.” Paragraph 9 of that document provides, “I agree to a search of my person,…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. SalvucciSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Minnesota v. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. BurtonOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
- State v. Butt, 22105 (5-30-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. DannebohmSupreme Court of Kansas · 2018
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. JosephSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2002
- State v. DannebohmSupreme Court of Kansas · 2018