Legal Opinion
State v. Arnett
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 14, 2000No. 1999-0468PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 88 Ohio St.3d 208.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. ARNETT, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Arnett,
2000-Ohio-302.] Criminal law—When sentencing judge acknowledges consulting a religious text during deliberations and quotes a portion of that text on the record in the sentencing proceeding, such conduct is not per se impermissible and does not violate the offender’s right to due process, when. When a sentencing judge acknowledges that he or she has consulted a religious text during his or her deliberations and quotes a portion of that…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Witherspoon v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Gardner v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Townsend v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- State v. MillsOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- Barclay v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- State v. LongOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. BaileyOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- State v. Woodruff, 07 Ca 2972 (3-4-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. Gray, 07 Ma 156 (12-12-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 2025
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.