State v. Hartup
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Patton, Judge.
On December 9, 1994, the General Assembly amended R.C. 2953.36 to provide that provisions of the Revised Code permitting the sealing of a record of conviction (R.C. 2953.32) do not apply to persons convicted of gross sexual imposition. The narrow issue before us is whether R.C. 2953.36, as amended, is unconstitutional as applied to offenders who were convicted before its effective date, but who by law could not file motions to seal their records of conviction until after the effective date.
In 1987, defendant Kimberly Hartup pleaded guilty to one count of gross sexual imposition.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- Lynce v. MathisSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Kneisley v. Lattimer-Stevens Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. BurkeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- City of Euclid v. SattlerOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
- Sifuentes v. Michigan, State ofDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2024
- State v. Brewer, Unpublished Decision (2-14-2003)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2003
- State v. C.W.D.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
- State v. Henyard, Unpublished Decision (2-22-2001)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.