Legal Opinion

Scopillitti v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 23, 1932PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VICKERY, J

It might here be pointed out that the defendant probably had waived his right to object to the proceedings by not filing a plea in abatement, i The fact of defendant’s minority was a defect extrinsic to the record, and §13439-7, being old §13622 GC, read's: “A plea in abatement may be made ,when there is a defect in the record shown by facts extrinsic thereto.”

In the case of State of Ohio v Klingen berger, 113 Oh St, 419, it was held in syllabus one as follows:

“A minor charged with felony waives his right to object to the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas on the ground of…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ex Parte LewisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1947
  2. State v. DehlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  3. In Re the Welfare of S. V.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  4. Clay v. Mountain Valley Mineral Ltd. PartnershipWyoming Supreme Court · 2015
  5. State Ex Rel. Pett v. JacksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958

1 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