State v. Lather

Ohio Supreme Court
State v. Lather, 113 Ohio St. 3d 264 (Ohio 2007)
864 N.E.2d 637
Connor, Cupp, Donnell, Lanzinger, Moyer, Pfeifer, Stratton

State v. Lather

Opinion of the Court

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted.

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals denying appellant’s motion to consider his remaining assignments of error is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals to consider the remaining assignments of error, consistent with this court’s order in 2005-0400, State v. Lather, issued February 7, 2007, 112 Ohio St.3d 1468, 2007-Ohio-388, 861 N.E.2d 142.

Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Cupp, JJ., concur. Lanzinger, J., dissents. Thomas L. Stierwalt, Sandusky County Prosecuting Attorney, and John P. Kolesar, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Michael W. Sandwisch, for appellant.

Reference

Full Case Name
The State of Ohio v. Lather
Status
Published