Luff v. State
Luff v. State
5 Ohio Law. Abs. 173
Opinion of the Court
Luff contends in the Supreme Court, that it is immaterial, that a former proceeding in error was affirmed and remanded for re-sentence, by the Supreme Court, and that when error is again presented, it makes no difference that Court of Appeals has passed on assignment of error, and fact that Appeals Court refuses to review because of no authority to do so, is not well taken.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.