History
  • No items yet
midpage
Beazell v. State
111 Ohio St. 838
Ohio
1924
Check Treatment

It is ordered and adjudged that this court does assume jurisdiction in deciding that it is discretionary for the trial judge to allow separate trials for those jointly indicted for the offense charged in the indictment therein, that the same applies to the remedy and manner of trial and the defendant George H. Beazell, plaintiff in error herein, has no vested right in the remedy or manner of trial provided by law, even though same may have been different at the date of the commission of the offense, and it is further ordered and adjudged that the record contains a constitutional question involving Section 10 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America, and this court having reviewed said question upon its merits, and all other errors assigned by the plaintiff in *Page 839 error herein, does find that there is no error upon the record in said proceedings and judgment.

It is, therefore, considered by the court that the judgment aforesaid of the Court of Appeals of Hamilton county, Ohio, be and the same hereby is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

MARSHALL, C.J., JONES, MATTHIAS, DAY, ALLEN and CONN, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Beazell v. State
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Dec 19, 1924
Citation: 111 Ohio St. 838
Docket Number: 18630
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.