Title: State v. Kittle

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as State v. Kittle, 100 Ohio St.3d 247, 2003-Ohio-5759.] 
 
 
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. KITTLE, APPELLANT. 
[Cite as State v. Kittle, 100 Ohio St.3d 247, 2003-Ohio-5759.] 
Discretionary appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. 3 only — Certification 
of conflict accepted — Court of appeals’ judgment reversed and cause 
remanded to trial court for further proceedings consistent with State v. 
Comer. 
(Nos. 2003-1292 and 2003-1293 — Submitted September 23, 2003 — Decided 
November 12, 2003.) 
APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Lucas County, No. L-
01-1469, 2003-Ohio-3097. 
__________________ 
{¶1} 
The discretionary appeal is allowed on Proposition of Law No. 3 
only. 
{¶2} 
The certification of conflict is accepted. 
{¶3} 
The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is 
remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with State v. Comer, 
99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, O’CONNOR and 
O’DONNELL, JJ., concur. 
 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissents. 
__________________ 
 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissenting. 
{¶4} 
For the reasons expressed in Judge Grady’s dissent in State v. 
Comer, 99 Ohio St.3d 463, 2003-Ohio-4165, 793 N.E.2d 473, ¶ 28-39, I 
respectfully dissent. 
__________________ 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Brenda J. 
Majdalani, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 
 
Gamso, Helmick & Hoolahan and Jeffrey M. Gamso, for appellant. 
__________________