State v. Reed
Citations
- 2020 Ohio 138
Syllabus
In the case of multiple controlled drug buys, the judge issuing the search warrants had a substantial basis for belief that appellant was engaged in drug trafficking. Appellant's Confrontation Clause rights were not violated. Appellant's convictions for trafficking in a controlled counterfeit substance were not supported by sufficient evidence. The court did not err in joining two separate cases involving drug trafficking for trial.
Judges: Pietrykowski
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court· 1983-06-08· cited 16,716×
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court· 1997-05-14· cited 16,183×
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 2004-03-08· cited 14,756×
- State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court· 1991-07-31· cited 11,342×
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1960-03-28· cited 4,796×
- State v. BurnsideOhio Supreme Court· 2003-10-22· cited 2,261×
- State v. LottOhio Supreme Court· 1990-06-06· cited 1,930×
- State v. GeorgeOhio Supreme Court· 1989-09-27· cited 672×
- State v. HankersonOhio Supreme Court· 1982-05-19· cited 556×
- State v. TorresOhio Supreme Court· 1981-06-10· cited 471×
- State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court· 1996-02-21· cited 286×
- State v. StahlOhio Supreme Court· 2006-11-08· cited 189×
- State v. GordonOhio Supreme Court· 2018-01-16· cited 58×
- State v. HurleyOhio Court of Appeals· 2014-06-23· cited 24×
- State v. GoodnerOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-09-30· cited 14×
- State v. YoungOhio Court of Appeals· 2015-01-30· cited 7×
- State v. GarrettOhio Court of Appeals· 2002-08-23· 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.