State v. Hill

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1994-08-03

Cited by 142 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

A. William Sweeney, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. While I agree with the law enunciated by the majority in the syllabus, I believe that the nature of the instant forfeiture was so excessive as to constitute a clear violation of Section 9, Article I of the Ohio Constitution and the Eighth Amendment to the *36 United States Co…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.