Ohio Court of Appeals· 9/25/2018
State v. Partee
Citations
- 2018 Ohio 3878
Syllabus
The trial court did not deny Partee the ability to cross-examine the witnesses, the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, the trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the case, Partee did not receive the ineffective assistance of counsel, and sufficient evidence supports Partee's conviction for obstructing official business.
Judges: Per Curiam
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court· 1997-05-14· cited 16,183×
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- State v. BarnesOhio Supreme Court· 2002-01-09· cited 2,256×
- State v. IssaOhio Supreme Court· 2001-08-29· cited 787×
- State v. ConwayOhio Supreme Court· 2006-06-21· cited 704×
- State v. TenaceOhio Supreme Court· 2006-05-31· cited 413×
- State v. MbodjiOhio Supreme Court· 2011-06-21· cited 107×
- State v. PilgrimOhio Court of Appeals· 2009-10-08· cited 92×
- State v. MahoneOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-03-27· cited 70×
- State v. HughesOhio Court of Appeals· 2015-01-20· cited 40×
- State v. HarrisOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-06-14· cited 40×
- State v. DarazimOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-11-28· cited 36×
- State v. HolbertOhio Supreme Court· 1974-05-01· cited 35×
- State v. WattsOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-08-16· cited 10×
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.