State v. Montgomery
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
In this third appeal, 1 appellant, Curtis Lee Montgomery, seeks to reverse his conviction of two drug offenses. He presents three assignments of error in which the principal claim is that the trial court erred with respect to the establishment of “bulk amount” of a Schedule II depressant (methaqualone) under R.C. 2925.01 (E)(8). These are not new issues because the means whereby bulk amount of a Schedule II depressant may be proved was set forth in a 1979 decision. Nevertheless, a careful review may be useful.
The first count of the indictment charged defendant with a sale on November 25,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tibbs v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- State v. PetroOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- State v. HowellOhio Court of Appeals · 1981
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. Pountney (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. KozicOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. HuberOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- State v. HowardOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
- State v. Brown, Unpublished Decision (2-2-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.