Legal Opinion
State v. Maust
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided March 1, 1982No. CA-751 and 752PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMilligan, J.
These two cases were consolidated for hearing and ruling.
The defendants were convicted of the criminal damaging of a motor vehicle (R.C. 2909.06[A][1]) after a joint trial by jury in the Municipal Court of Ashland. After sentencing, they appeal, assigning two errors:
“I. The trial court erred in overruling defendants’ motion for an order dismissing the complaints against the defendants at the close of the state’s case in that the state failed to present sufficient evidence to establish all elements of the offense charged, specifically, ownership of the 1975 Chevrolet Monza by Jerry A. Harned,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Grogan Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. GottfriedOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
- Joiner v. Illuminating Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1978
- State v. EmmonsOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. RussellOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
- State v. BaldwinOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- Mortensen v. Butler Cty. Bd. of Commrs, Ca2007-04-088 (3-10-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. SherrellOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
- State v. AnthonyOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.