# State v. Puckett

> Ohio Court of Appeals · December 28, 2010 · 191 Ohio App. 3d 747

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802284

## Case

- **Full name:** The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. PUCKETT, Appellant
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 28, 2010
- **Citations:** 191 Ohio App. 3d 747; 947 N.E.2d 730; 2010 Ohio 6597
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Harsha
- **Judges:** McFarland, Harsha
- **Cited by:** 41 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802284

## Opinion text

Harsha, Judge,
concurring.
{¶ 40} I agree with the analysis of the principal opinion but note that because the corpus delicti rule is foundational in character, the rules of evidence are generally not applicable in the admissibility analysis. See In re W.B. II, Highland App. No. 08CA18, 2009-Ohio-1707 , 2009 WL 961500 , at ¶ 32. Accordingly, both the trial court and this court can consider hearsay, if it is deemed rehable, in deciding whether the appellant’s confession is admissible.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802284. Public record. Not legal advice.