State v. Smith

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

1 THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, V. SMITH, APPELLANT. 2 [Cite as State v. Smith (1996), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 3 Criminal law -- Drug offenses -- R.C. 2925.14(H) does not violate the due 4 process or equal protection provisions of the Ohio and United States 5 Constitutions. 6 (No. 95-1183 -- Submitted June 5, 1996 -- Decided July 3, 1996.) 7 APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Washington County, No. 94 CA 8 9 21. _________ 10 Robert J. Smith, for appellee. 11 David H. Bodiker, Ohio Public Defender. 12 J. Michael Westfall, Assistant Public Defender, and Janet A. Fogle, 13 14 Washington County Public Defender, for appellant. _________ 15 The judgment of the court of appeals, upholding the constitutionality 16 of R.C. 2925.14(H), is affirmed on the authority of State v. Thompkins 17 (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 558, ___ N.E.2d ___. 1 2 MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur. 3 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.