State v. O'Brien

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1987-12-09

Cited by 261 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Sweeney, J., dissenting. In my opinion, the majority’s requirement that reassertion of constitutional rights to a speedy trial may only be accomplished by a formal written objection and demand for trial is both unreasonable and unnecessary; therefore, I must dissent from the majority decision herein. The most troubling aspect of today’s decision is that it exalts administrative convenience over fundamental consti…

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.