Legal Opinion
State v. Layton
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided May 14, 1996No. 95APC09-1186PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Strausbaugh, Judge.
Defendant-appellant, Lynne Layton, appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Municipal Court finding her guilty of OMVI per se in violation of R.C. 4511.19(A)(3). Appellant had filed pretrial motions to suppress and to dismiss. A hearing was held on appellant’s motion to suppress, which alleged that the BAC test results pertaining to her were obtained in violation of her rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, United States Constitution; Sections 10 and 16, Article I, Ohio Constitution; and R.C. 2935.20. At the close of the hearing, the trial court found a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- City of Lakewood v. WaselenchukOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
- City of Fairborn v. MattachioneOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- City of Columbus v. ReidOhio Court of Appeals · 1986
- State v. FootlickOhio Supreme Court · 1965
- State v. MasonOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
3Cited by3 opinions
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. DeeringCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2014
- State v. StoverOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
- Columbus v. Dixon, 07ap-536 (4-29-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008