Legal Opinion

State v. Clark

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1994No. 1993-2490PublishedCited by 126 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.

The sole issue certified for our review is whether a trial court is under a mandatory duty to voir dire a witness on the question of the witness’s competency, when the witness is ten years or older at the time of trial but was under ten years of age at the time of the events giving rise to the witness’s testimony. For the reasons which follow, we answer that question in the negative.

Evid.R. 601 sets out the general rule of competency for all witnesses. It states:

“Every person is competent to be a witness except:
“(A) Those of unsound mind, and children under ten years of age, who appear…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. BradleyOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Turner v. TurnerOhio Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. MorelandOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. BostonOhio Supreme Court · 1989

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

3Cited by126 opinions

  1. State v. Cepec (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  2. State v. WellmanOhio Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. State v. BoshkoOhio Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. State v. EllisOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. State v. ReinerOhio Supreme Court · 2000

121 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