State v. Stephens

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1970-11-10

Cited by 232 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Johnson, J. The principal error assigned arises out of statements made by the prosecutor in his final argument to the jury, which statements made direct reference to defendant’s silence at the time of his arrest. This was done for the apparent purpose of implying defendant’s guilty knowledge that the prescription was forged. Such statements appear in the bill of exceptions, as follows: “Mr. Mayar [prosecutor]: *…

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.