Legal Opinion

State v. Yackley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 14, 1989No. 88-488PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtH. Brown, J.

The sole question is whether under R.C. 2953.31 et seq., prior to the 1984 amendment, a conviction for violating R.C. 4511.19 barred the expungement of the record of a conviction of another criminal offense. We answer this query affirmatively and affirm the decision of the court of appeals.

Prior to the 1984 amendment, R.C. 2953.31 et seq. provided for expungement of a defendant’s record of conviction upon a finding (among other things) that the applicant was a first offender. 135 Ohio Laws, Part I, 70. R.C. 2953.31 defined a “first offender” for purposes of R.C. 2953.31 to 2953.36 as “* * *…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. ThomasOhio Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. State v. PetrouOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. State v. WeberOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. In Re BradyOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  5. City of Chillicothe v. HerronOhio Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. HilbertOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. City of Dayton v. SheibenbergerOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. State v. MayOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. State v. SandlinOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. NagleOhio Court of Appeals · 1995

1 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