No. 24-6927
Bryant Cobb v. Ohio
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review constitutional-rights excessive-bail fourteenth-amendment fourth-amendment motion-to-suppress
Key Terms:
DueProcess Privacy
DueProcess Privacy
Latest Conference:
2025-05-02
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ohio Court of Appeals' affirmation of the denial of Petitioner's motion to suppress violates the Excessive Bail Clause and Fourth Amendment as applied to Ohio through the Fourteenth Amendment
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Whether the Ohio Court of Appeals for the Fifth Appellate District ’s affirmation of the denial of Petitioner ’s motion to suppress is repugnant to the “Excessive Bail ” Clause of U.S. Constitution, Amendment VIII and to U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV (as both provisions are applicable to Ohio under the “Privileges or Immunities ” and “Due Process ” Clauses of U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, §l). i
Docket Entries
2025-07-21
Rehearing DENIED.
2025-06-26
DISTRIBUTED.
2025-05-28
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2025-05-05
Petition DENIED.
2025-04-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/2/2025.
2025-04-11
Waiver of Ohio of right to respond submitted.
2025-04-11
Waiver of right of respondent Ohio to respond filed.
2025-03-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 5, 2025)
Attorneys
Ohio
Michael Jason Hendershot — Ohio Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Michael Jason Hendershot — Ohio Attorney General's Office, Respondent