¶1{¶ 1} Proposition of Law No. I is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently accepted. On consideration of Proposition of Law No. IV, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of State v. Hodge, 128 Ohio St.3d 1, 2010-Ohio-6320, 941 N.E.2d 768. On consideration of Proposition of Law No. VI, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of State v. Dunlap, 129 Ohio St.3d 461, 2011-Ohio-4111, 953 N.E.2d 816.
130 Ohio St. 3d 205
State v. Freeman
Decided October 12, 2011
Ohio Supreme Court · decided 2011-10-12
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 2011
1 state decisions
Relies on State v. Hodge · State v. Dunlap
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2011-10-12
View the full empirical analysis of this case →