neutral
Cited (no substantive treatment)
Issue: ex post facto clauseOH ↗
Issue: res judicata bars further litigation doctrineOH ↗
Issue: res judicata bars the further litigation doctrineOH ↗
0.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The State of Ohio
v.
Hackney
v.
Hackney
No. 95-636.
Ohio Supreme Court.
Aug 23, 1995.
Donald W. White, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, and David, Henry Hoffmann, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.,
James R. Hackney, pro se.
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Per Curiam.
We affirm the decision of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in its judgment entry.
Judgment affirmed.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.