Search results
Martin admitted that she Page 480 U. S. 237 shot her husband, but claimed that she acted in self-defense. Because self-defense is classified as an "affirmative" defense in Ohio, the jury was instructed that Martin had the burden of proving her claim by a preponderance of the evidence.
Martin v. Ohio, 480 U.S. 228 (1987), is a criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the presumption of innocence requiring prosecution to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt only applies to elements of the offense, and does not extend to the defense of justification, whereby states could legislate a ...
Martin lost control and fired the gun at her husband, killing him. Martin was charged with aggravated murder, which Ohio law defined as purposely causing another’s death with prior calculation and design.
The jury found her guilty, and both the Ohio Court of Appeals and Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting petitioner's Due Process Clause challenge which was based on the charge's placing on her the self-defense burden of proof. In reaching its decision, the State Supreme Court relied on Patterson v.
Martin v. Ohio. Media. Oral Argument - December 02, 1986. Opinion Announcement - February 25, 1987. Opinions. Syllabus. View Case. Petitioner. Martin. Respondent. Ohio. Docket no. 85-6461. Decided by. Rehnquist Court. Lower court. Ohio Supreme Court. Citation. 480 US 228 (1987) Argued. Dec 2, 1986. Decided. Feb 25, 1987. Advocates.
MARTIN v. OHIO is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 25, 1987. The case was argued before the court on December 2, 1986. In a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the lower court. The case originated from the Ohio State Trial Court.
Martin v. Ohio. No. 85-6461. Argued December 2, 1986. Decided February 25, 1987. 480 U.S. 228. Syllabus. Under the Ohio Revised Code (Code), the burden of proving the elements of a criminal offense is upon the prosecution, but, for an affirmative defense, the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence is placed on the accused.
![[My] Fayette County Ohio History: The Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in ...](https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?p=martin+v+ohio&ei=UTF-8&norw=1&age=1d&th=124.7&tw=166.5&imgurl=https%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_QiMHsC2GmoU%2FTAvVY0W2h0I%2FAAAAAAAAABU%2Fi9puowOPvg4%2Fs1600%2FIMG_0139.JPG&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fmyfayettecountyohiohistory.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F06%2Frevolutionary-soldiers-buried-in.html&size=453KB&name=%5BMy%5D+Fayette+County+Ohio+History%3A+The+Revolutionary+Soldiers+Buried+in+...&oid=3&h=1200&w=1600&turl=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.vU4wSrP5Fls9e-eBIF9jkQHaFj%26pid%3DApi%26rs%3D1%26c%3D1%26qlt%3D95%26w%3D166%26h%3D124&tt=%5BMy%5D+Fayette+County+Ohio+History%3A+The+Revolutionary+Soldiers+Buried+in+...&sigr=Dm0F5Sz4kn5A&sigit=lMf_QlCBxbd2&sigi=Xecn.KSBhKpy&sign=1SHl8GFYk_Hd&sigt=1SHl8GFYk_Hd "[My] Fayette County Ohio History: The Revolutionary Soldiers Buried in ...")
