State v. Brock
Citations
- 2025 Ohio 2538
Syllabus
The trial court did not err in refusing to excuse two prospective jurors for cause, admitting challenged video recordings into evidence, or declining to give requested special jury instructions. The appellant's convictions for gross sexual imposition and illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Tucker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court· 1991-07-31· cited 11,342×
- Berk v. MatthewsOhio Supreme Court· 1990-08-29· cited 987×
- State v. GusterOhio Supreme Court· 1981-05-27· cited 224×
- State v. FranklinOhio Supreme Court· 2002-10-16· cited 168×
- Shifflett v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1981-01-16· cited 30×
- State v. FairOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-09-02· cited 21×
- State v. ElliottOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-11-07· cited 14×
- Garry v. BorgerOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-03-22· cited 14×
- Randall Artis v. Adrian SantosSeventh Circuit· 2024-03-08· cited 12×
- Estate of Price v. Kidney Care Specialist, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2024-08-16· cited 2×
- Curley v. WilcoxOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-09-29· cited 1×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.