Legal Opinion

State v. Patterson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1982No. Nos. 81-556 and 81-557PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Per curiam

In State v. Scott (1982), 69 Ohio St. 2d 439, we observed that the nature of the substance delivered does not necessarily determine whether a defendant has “offered] to sell a controlled substance.” “A person can ‘offer to sell a controlled substance’ in violation of R. C. 2925.03(A)(1) without transferring a controlled substance to the buyer.” Scott, supra. That same reasoning applies to cases arising under R. C. 2925.03(A)(1), (5) or (7), because the controlling language in all three subsections is the same: offer to sell a controlled substance.

The trial court, in cases Nos. 81-556 and 557,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  2. State v. ScottOhio Supreme Court · 1982

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. MughniOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  3. State v. ChandlerOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State v. SwayOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Garr v. Warden, Madison Corr. Inst.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010

19 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