STATE v. ZUERN

No. 86-1130.

32 Ohio St. 3d 56 (1987)

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. ZUERN, APPELLANT.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided August 12, 1987.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Arthur M. Ney, Jr., prosecuting attorney, and William E. Breyer, for appellee.

Robert R. Hastings, Jr., and Robert V. Wood, for appellant.


HOLMES, J.

We begin our analysis of this appeal by considering the specific issues raised concerning the proceedings below. In his first proposition of law, appellant urges that the trial court committed prejudicial error by denying his request to have the jury view the crime scene, i.e., the maximum security cell. He contends that such a viewing would have aided the trier of fact to better understand the testimony concerning the size of the cell and its relative...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases