Legal Opinion
State v. Gowdy
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided April 28, 2000No. 98-2301PublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.
As a threshold matter, the issues of facial due process and all issues regarding the registration and notification provisions of R.C. Chapter 2950 are resolved by State v. Williams, No. 99-286, State v. Worthy, No. 99-764, and State v. Suffecool, No. 99-765, decided today. Today we address due process as it relates to notice of the sexual offender classification hearing under R.C. 2950.09(B), as well as the other non-R.C. Chapter 2950 issues raised in this appeal.
Batson-Related Peremptory Challenge
In his first proposition of law, defendant claims that the state used a pretextual reason for a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. BradleyOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- Hernandez v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Swain v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- State v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. HunterOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. EppingerOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. EppingerOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. WinbushOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.