1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Ohio
  4. 75 Ohio
  5. 75 Ohio St.3d 7 (1996)
 

STATE v. BISTARKEY

No. 94-2114.

75 Ohio St.3d 7 (1996)

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

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided March 1, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

James A. Philomena, Mahoning County Prosecuting Attorney, and Michele G. Cerni, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

John J. Dixon and Stuart J. Banks, for appellant.

PFEIFER, J.

We find that R.C. 2947.061's language that its operation is "[s]ubject to sections 2951.02 to 2951.09 of the Revised Code" plainly means that eligibility for probation under R.C. 2951.02 is a prerequisite to eligibility for shock probation under R.C. 2947.061. We therefore affirm the appellate court.

R.C. 2947.061(B), which allows a defendant to move for shock probation after serving six months of a...

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