Notes of Decisions
Cited in
152
cases (
18 in the last 5 years), 1955–2025 · leading case:
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
· cites it 31× “03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017 Ohio 2956 (Ohio 2017).
· cites it 8× “However, as part of Ohio’s response to rising juvenile crime, in 1996, the General Assembly enacted 2 January Term, 2017 former R.C. 2151.26, now R.C. 2152.12,1 State v.”
State v. Walls, 96 Ohio St. 3d 437 (Ohio 2002).
· cites it 12× “At the center of this jurisdictional argument is his belief that application of *440 the 1997 statutes, R.C. 2151.26 and 2151.011(B)(6), violated the RetroactivityClause of the Ohio Constitution.”
State v. Walls, 2002 Ohio 5059 (Ohio 2002).
· cites it 12× “rson who is under the age of eighteen years, except that any child who violates a federal or state law or municipal ordinance prior to attaining eighteen years of age shall be deemed a ‘child’ irrespective of his age at the time the complaint is filed or hearing had on the…”
State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001).
· cites it 10× “2d 568, 570-571 , quoting R.C. 2151.26 as in effect in 1971 (133 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2049); State v.”
State v. Wilson, 652 N.E.2d 196 (Ohio 1995).
· cites it 15× “The issues certified to this court are: (1) “In the absence of a bindover from juvenile court pursuant to R.C. 2151.26, does the general division of the common pteas [sic ] court have jurisdiction to try, convict and sentence a juvenile defendant?” and (2) “In the absence of the…”
State v. Hanning, 728 N.E.2d 1059 (Ohio 2000).
· cites it 18× “03, applies to juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. For the reasons that follow, we find that it does not and we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.”
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 757 N.E.2d 1153 (Ohio 2001).
· cites it 13× “Instead, we merely determined what R.C. 2151.26 has meant since its enactment.”
State v. Iacona, 2001 Ohio 1292 (Ohio 2001).
· cites it 14× “] Juvenile court—Transfer of case for criminal prosecution—Prosecutor under duty to disclose to juvenile respondent all evidence in state’s possession favorable to juvenile respondent and material either to guilt or punishment that is known at time of mandatory bindover hearing…”
Agee v. Russell, 2001 Ohio 1279 (Ohio 2001).
· cites it 34× “03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” {¶ 10} Shortly following our decision in Hanning, Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him…”
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
· cites it 25× “03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A) — 19 cases
State v. Walls, 96 Ohio St. 3d 437 (Ohio 2002).
“At the center of this jurisdictional argument is his belief that application of *440 the 1997 statutes, R.C. 2151.26 and 2151.011(B)(6), violated the RetroactivityClause of the Ohio Constitution.”
State v. Walls, 2002 Ohio 5059 (Ohio 2002).
“rson who is under the age of eighteen years, except that any child who violates a federal or state law or municipal ordinance prior to attaining eighteen years of age shall be deemed a ‘child’ irrespective of his age at the time the complaint is filed or hearing had on the…”
State v. Wilson, 652 N.E.2d 196 (Ohio 1995).
“The issues certified to this court are: (1) “In the absence of a bindover from juvenile court pursuant to R.C. 2151.26, does the general division of the common pteas [sic ] court have jurisdiction to try, convict and sentence a juvenile defendant?” and (2) “In the absence of the…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(1) — 7 cases
State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001).
“2d 568, 570-571 , quoting R.C. 2151.26 as in effect in 1971 (133 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2049); State v.”
State v. Wilson, 652 N.E.2d 196 (Ohio 1995).
“The issues certified to this court are: (1) “In the absence of a bindover from juvenile court pursuant to R.C. 2151.26, does the general division of the common pteas [sic ] court have jurisdiction to try, convict and sentence a juvenile defendant?” and (2) “In the absence of the…”
State v. Iacona, 2001 Ohio 1292 (Ohio 2001).
“] Juvenile court—Transfer of case for criminal prosecution—Prosecutor under duty to disclose to juvenile respondent all evidence in state’s possession favorable to juvenile respondent and material either to guilt or punishment that is known at time of mandatory bindover hearing…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(1)(3)(a) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(1)(a) — 4 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
Agee v. Russell, 2001 Ohio 1279 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” {¶ 10} Shortly following our decision in Hanning, Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(1)(c) — 8 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(2) — 3 cases
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 757 N.E.2d 1153 (Ohio 2001).
“Instead, we merely determined what R.C. 2151.26 has meant since its enactment.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(2)(a) — 2 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(A)(3) — 7 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(AX1) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B) — 26 cases
State v. Iacona, 2001 Ohio 1292 (Ohio 2001).
“] Juvenile court—Transfer of case for criminal prosecution—Prosecutor under duty to disclose to juvenile respondent all evidence in state’s possession favorable to juvenile respondent and material either to guilt or punishment that is known at time of mandatory bindover hearing…”
State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001).
“2d 568, 570-571 , quoting R.C. 2151.26 as in effect in 1971 (133 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2049); State v.”
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(1) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(2) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(3) — 7 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017 Ohio 2956 (Ohio 2017).
“However, as part of Ohio’s response to rising juvenile crime, in 1996, the General Assembly enacted 2 January Term, 2017 former R.C. 2151.26, now R.C. 2152.12,1 State v.”
Agee v. Russell, 2001 Ohio 1279 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” {¶ 10} Shortly following our decision in Hanning, Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(3)(a) — 6 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001).
“2d 568, 570-571 , quoting R.C. 2151.26 as in effect in 1971 (133 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2049); State v.”
State v. Iacona, 2001 Ohio 1292 (Ohio 2001).
“] Juvenile court—Transfer of case for criminal prosecution—Prosecutor under duty to disclose to juvenile respondent all evidence in state’s possession favorable to juvenile respondent and material either to guilt or punishment that is known at time of mandatory bindover hearing…”
Agee v. Russell, 2001 Ohio 1279 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” {¶ 10} Shortly following our decision in Hanning, Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(4) — 3 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(B)(4)(b) — 16 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
State v. Aalim (Slip Opinion), 2017 Ohio 2956 (Ohio 2017).
“However, as part of Ohio’s response to rising juvenile crime, in 1996, the General Assembly enacted 2 January Term, 2017 former R.C. 2151.26, now R.C. 2152.12,1 State v.”
State v. Hanning, 728 N.E.2d 1059 (Ohio 2000).
“03, applies to juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. For the reasons that follow, we find that it does not and we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.”
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 757 N.E.2d 1153 (Ohio 2001).
“Instead, we merely determined what R.C. 2151.26 has meant since its enactment.”
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C) — 16 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
State v. Hanning, 728 N.E.2d 1059 (Ohio 2000).
“03, applies to juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. For the reasons that follow, we find that it does not and we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.”
State v. Iacona, 752 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 2001).
“2d 568, 570-571 , quoting R.C. 2151.26 as in effect in 1971 (133 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2049); State v.”
Johnson v. Timmerman-Cooper, 757 N.E.2d 1153 (Ohio 2001).
“Instead, we merely determined what R.C. 2151.26 has meant since its enactment.”
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(1) — 2 cases
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(1)(b) — 2 cases
Agee v. Russell, 751 N.E.2d 1043 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” Shortly following our decision in Hanning , Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him from…”
Agee v. Russell, 2001 Ohio 1279 (Ohio 2001).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26.” {¶ 10} Shortly following our decision in Hanning, Agee filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for Warren County for a writ of habeas corpus to compel appellee, his prison warden, to release him…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(1)(c) — 4 cases
State v. Hanning, 728 N.E.2d 1059 (Ohio 2000).
“03, applies to juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. For the reasons that follow, we find that it does not and we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.”
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(2) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(2)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Hanning, 728 N.E.2d 1059 (Ohio 2000).
“03, applies to juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. For the reasons that follow, we find that it does not and we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.”
State v. Hanning, 2000 Ohio 436 (Ohio 2000).
“03, does not apply to the juvenile bindover criteria set forth in R.C. 2151.26. 1. The mandatory bindover provision of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(C)(4) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(D) — 2 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(E) — 13 cases
State v. Wilson, 652 N.E.2d 196 (Ohio 1995).
“The issues certified to this court are: (1) “In the absence of a bindover from juvenile court pursuant to R.C. 2151.26, does the general division of the common pteas [sic ] court have jurisdiction to try, convict and sentence a juvenile defendant?” and (2) “In the absence of the…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(F) — 3 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.26(G) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.