Court Opinion

ID: 9477276
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:19:00.817759+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:45:47.443853
License: Public Domain

WELLFORD, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. It is for Ohio courts to interpret the nature of the action *356taken by the Juvenile Division Court with respect to whether the hearing of February 23, 1978 and the resulting action constituted a probable cause hearing or an adjudication of delinquency. The interpretation made may be debatable, but it is founded upon supportable bases. It is entitled to a presumption of correctness. I would not, therefore, further “second guess” the Ohio courts which determined that Sellers’ double jeopardy claim is not viable in light of the facts and the applicable Ohio law.
I agree that Sellers as an initial matter, did not waive his claimed double jeopardy defense, and that his objection to the magistrate’s report is sufficient for appellate review.