Legal Opinion

State v. Casalicchio

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1991No. 89-1865PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.

The state asserts that Casalicchio’s automobile falls within Ohio’s contraband forfeiture statutes *179and the trial court’s action was proper in all respects. Casalicchio raises several constitutional challenges to the forfeiture statutes on cross-appeal, challenging them on their face and as applied in this case. The state’s and Casalicchio’s assertions require a significant review of R.C. 2933.42 and R. C. 2933.43, Ohio’s contraband forfeiture statutes.

I

Initially, Casalicchio challenges on due process grounds the scope of the forfeiture statutes. Specifically, he questions whether his…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. State v. GustafsonOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. United States v. $174,206.00 in U.S. Currency, Thomas Richard, Dacia LoveCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  3. Department of Liquor Control v. Sons of Italy Lodge 0917Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Dardinger v. Anthem Blue Cross & Blue SheildOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  5. State v. DepueOhio Court of Appeals · 1994

41 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