Case Name: VOLRICH v. STATE
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1925-11-02
Citations: 4 Ohio Law Abs. 253
Docket Number: No. 278
Parties: VOLRICH v. STATE
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 4
Pages: 253–253

Head Matter:
VOLRICH v. STATE
Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist., Butler Co.
No. 278.
Decided Nov. 2, 1925
Attorneys — Clinton H. Boyd, Middletown, for Volrich; Murphy & Joseph, Cincinnati, for State.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
John Volrich was tried for illegal possession of intoxicating liquor. The trial court admitted in evidence a written report purporting to be a chemical analysis of certain wine charged to have been in possession of Volrich.
This ease was originally tried in the court of the Mayor of the Village of Monroe; error was prosecuted to the Butler Common Pleas, which affirmed the judgment of the mayor's court. Error was again prosecuted to the Court of Appeals which held:
In view of the fact that no opportunity was given Volrich to cross-examine the chemist making the analysis, admission of the report was prejudicial error.
Judgment reversed.