Legal Opinion
State v. Adamson
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided September 30, 1998No. 97-1022PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.
The principal issue before us is whether immunity that has been granted pursuant to R.C. 2945.44 continues when the person receiving immunity refuses to testify at a retrial. For the reasons that follow, wé hold that it does.
First, we address Adamson’s cross-appeal. She argues that when Crim.R. 12(J) was amended on July 1, 1995, it was intended “to encompass all appeals taken by the state of Ohio.” According to that argument, the state filed its appeal outside the seven-day period provided by Crim.R. 12(J) and the appeal should have been denied.
The court of appeals stated, and we agree, that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
- Ricketts v. AdamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Quonset Hut, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Koren v. GroganOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. FisherOhio Supreme Court · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. MucciOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
- State v. WeaverOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
- State v. AdamsonOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. GubanichOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
- Jones v. Arel Communications, Unpublished Decision (4-25-2003)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2003