State v. Hare
Citations
- 2022 Ohio 1931
Syllabus
MISTRIAL – DOUBLE JEOPARDY: The trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to dismiss the assault charge on double-jeopardy grounds where the original trial judge's declaration of a mistrial was supported by a manifest necessity the original trial judge felt that she could no longer be fair and impartial due to disagreements with defense counsel during the course of the trial.
Judges: Crouse
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1978-02-21· cited 2,314×
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court· 1989-05-15· cited 1,945×
- United States v. PerezSupreme Court· 1824-03-23· cited 1,814×
- Wade v. HunterSupreme Court· 1949-04-25· cited 1,511×
- United States v. WilsonSupreme Court· 1975-02-25· cited 1,334×
- State v. BrownOhio Supreme Court· 2008-09-17· cited 413×
- State v. GloverOhio Supreme Court· 1988-01-13· cited 270×
- State v. DeanOhio Supreme Court· 2010-10-26· cited 115×
- State v. WidnerOhio Supreme Court· 1981-12-30· cited 107×
- John Glover v. Norris W. McMackin WardenSixth Circuit· 1991-11-22· cited 83×
- State v. Mutter (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2017-05-24· cited 50×
- State v. Anderson (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2016-09-14· cited 48×
- In Re Harold E. Ford, (91-5497). United States of America v. Harold E. Ford, Douglas Beaty, Karl A. Schledwitz, and David Crabtree, (91-5548)Sixth Circuit· 1992-03-02· cited 43×
- State v. MeadeOhio Supreme Court· 1997-12-24· cited 31×
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.