Legal Opinion
State v. Huertas
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided May 9, 1990No. 88-1627PublishedCited by 138 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.
For the reasons which follow, we affirm appellant’s conviction, but vacate the sentence of death and remand for imposition of a life sentence in accord with State v. Penix (1987), 32 Ohio St. 3d 369, 513 N.E. 2d 744.
I
Admission of Victim Impact Evidence
In his second proposition of law, appellant challenges the use of victim impact evidence at the penalty phase of his trial.
In the instant case, appellant requested a presentence investigation report pursuant to R.C. 2929.03(D)(1). The report contained a summary of an interview with the victim’s parents, Ralph, Sr., and Elizabeth Harris, in which…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Wainwright v. WittSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Enmund v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Riverside Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Lockhart v. McCreeSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Booth v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by138 opinions
- Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- State v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. TreeshOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. LeonardOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. WaddyOhio Supreme Court · 1992
133 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.