Legal Opinion

State v. Ross

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 2010No. 2009-1619Published

1Opinion of the Court

[Cite as State v. Ross, 128 Ohio St.3d 283,

2010-Ohio-6282.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. ROSS, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Ross, 128 Ohio St.3d 283,

2010-Ohio-6282.] Criminal procedure — Crim.R. 29(C) — Crim.R. 29 and 45(B) do not permit a defendant to file a motion to renew an already denied motion for acquittal outside the Crim.R. 29(C) time frame — Cause remanded. (No. 2009-1619  Submitted September 15, 2010  Decided December 28, 2010.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Summit County, No. 21906, 184 Ohio App.3d 174,

2009-Ohio-3561. __________________ CUPP, J. {¶ 1} This appeal…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Kontrick v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975

21 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