Legal Opinion

State v. Thompson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 24, 1981No. 80-1055PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Per curiam

As a general rule, evidence of previous or subsequent criminal acts, wholly independent of the criminal offense for which a defendant is on trial, is inadmissible. State v. Wilkinson (1980), 64 Ohio St. 2d 308, 314; State v. Curry (1975), 43 Ohio St. 2d 66, 68-69; State v. Burson (1974), 38 Ohio St. 2d 157, 158; State v. Hector (1969), 19 Ohio St. 2d 167, paragraph one of the syllabus; Whiteman v. State (1928), 119 Ohio St. 285; State v. Lawrence (1906), 74 Ohio St. 38.

R. C. 2945.59 codifies exceptions to this general rule. It provides:

“In any criminal case in which the defendant’s motive or…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. State v. LytleOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  3. State v. CurryOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  4. State v. HectorOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  5. State v. GardnerOhio Supreme Court · 1979

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. State v. Grate (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. SpisakOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State v. EcholsOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. State v. WillsOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
  5. State v. PrimeauOhio Court of Appeals · 2012

41 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