Legal Opinion

State v. Stevens

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1987No. 86-685PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellant-surety contends that Crim. R. 46(J) requires prior actual notice to the surety of a bond continuation, and that a trial court cannot act unilaterally without affording the surety actual notice. The surety submits that fundamental notions of due process of law and fairness accord a right of actual prior notice to the surety of such a continuation by the trial court. In support of its argument, the surety relies on Ohio Furniture Co. v. Mindala (1986), 22 Ohio St. 3d 99, 22 OBR 133, 488 N.E. 2d 881; and Peebles v. Clement (1980), 63 Ohio St. 2d 314, 17 O.O. 3d 203, 408 N.E. 2d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Taylor v. TaintorSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
  2. Ohio Furniture Co. v. MindalaOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. HughesOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Lakengren, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Peebles v. ClementOhio Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. LeeOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
  2. State v. GuzmanOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  3. State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  4. State ex rel. Garcia v. BaldwinOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  5. State v. BanksOhio Court of Appeals · 2023

2 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