Ohio Supreme Court, 1998

State v. Madrigal

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided September 24, 1998 · Consider, Douglas, From, Memo, Moyer, Pfeifer, Portion, Record, Review, Seal, Should, Stratton, Strike, That, Then

83 Ohio St. 3d 1437; 699 N.E.2d 950; 1998 Ohio LEXIS 2715

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

State v. Madrigal (Ohio 2000)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Lucas App. No. CR965761. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Lucas County. Upon consideration of appellee’s motion for release of portion of record under seal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for release of portion of record under seal be, and hereby is, denied.

Moyer, C.J., concurs and would also strike the sealed portion from the record. Douglas, J., concurs and would also strike the sealed memo. Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs and notes that the court should not consider the portion of record under seal as not part of the record. Pfeifer, J., would review the sealed record and consider releasing then.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.