Case Name: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fortman, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1998-11-25
Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 14
Docket Number: No. 98-899
Parties: The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fortman, Appellant.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 84
Pages: 14–15

Head Matter:
The State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Fortman, Appellant.
[Cite as State v. Fortman (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 14.]
(No. 98-899
Submitted October 13, 1998
Decided November 25, 1998.)
Mathias H. Heck, Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and Cheryl A. Ross, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Rudd, Silverberg, Zaharieff & Orlins Co., L.P.A., and Anthony J. Zaharieff, for appellant.

Opinion:
The judgment of the court of appeals on Proposition of Law No. I is affirmed on the authority of State v. Cook (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 404, 700 N.E.2d 570.
The appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently allowed on Proposition of Law No. II.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.