State v. Fluharty

2011 Ohio 4074
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedAugust 8, 2011
Docket2010CA00242
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2011 Ohio 4074 (State v. Fluharty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Fluharty, 2011 Ohio 4074 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Fluharty, 2011-Ohio-4074.]

COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

: JUDGES: STATE OF OHIO : W. Scott Gwin, P.J. : William B. Hoffman, J. Plaintiff-Appellant : Julie A. Edwards, J. : -vs- : Case No. 2010CA00242 : : MARION FLUHARTY : OPINION

Defendant-Appellee

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Criminal Appeal from Stark County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 2010-CR-0220

JUDGMENT: Reversed and Remanded

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: August 8, 2011

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiff-Appellant For Defendant-Appellee

JOHN D. FERRERO TAMMI JOHNSON Prosecuting Attorney Stark County Public Defender’s Office Stark County, Ohio 200 W. Tuscarawas Street, Suite 200 Canton, Ohio 44702 BY: KATHLEEN O. TATARSKY RENEE M. WATSON Assistant Prosecuting Attorney’s 110 Central Plaza South, Ste. 510 Appellate Section Canton, Ohio 44702-1413 [Cite as State v. Fluharty, 2011-Ohio-4074.]

Edwards, J.

{¶1} Plaintiff-appellant, State of Ohio, appeals from the August 19, 2010,

Judgment Entry of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas granting defendant-

appellee’s Motion to Dismiss.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE

{¶2} On or about November 4, 1999, appellee, Marion Fluharty, was convicted

in Stark County Case No 1999CR1122 of rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02. a felony of

the first degree. Appellee was sentenced to ten years in prison. As memorialized in a

Judgment Entry filed in such case on November 12, 1999, appellee was determined to

be a sexual predator under Megan’s law.

{¶3} On January 1, 2008, Ohio's Adam Walsh Act (“AWA”) went into effect,

repealing Megan's Law and altering the classification, registration, and notification

scheme of convicted sex offenders. See R.C. Chapter 2950. Thereafter, appellee was

reclassified as a Tier III offender under the AWA and was required to verify his address

every ninety days for life at least twenty days prior to any change of address. R.C.

2950.05(A).

{¶4} Thereafter, on March 8, 2010, the Stark County Grand Jury indicted

appellee in the case sub judice on one count of failure to provide written notice of

residence address change in violation of R.C. 2950.05(A)(E)(1), a felony of the first

degree. The indictment indicated that appellee, having been classified a Tier III

offender, had failed to provide written notice of a residence change to the Stark County

Sheriff’s Office at least twenty days prior to the change of address. At his arraignment

on March 12, 2010, appellee entered a plea of not guilty to the charge. Stark County App. Case No. 2010CA00242 3

{¶5} On March 12, 2010, appellee filed a Motion for a Bill of Particulars. The

Bill of Particulars that was filed on March 16, 2010, stated, in relevant part, as follows:

{¶6} “Date: On or about January 29, 2010;

{¶7} “Location: Stark County, Ohio;

{¶8} “On or about January 29, 2010, the defendant having been previously

classified as a Tier III offender and being a person required to notify the Stark County

Sheriff’s Department of a change of address; failed to provide a written notice of an

address change at least twenty (20) days prior to said change. The defendant was

convicted of Rape a felony of the first degree. Defendant last registered an address of

1115 Second Street, Room 2, Canton, Stark County, Ohio on December 9, 2009.

Defendant moved from the address on January 29, 2010 to 601 Brown Ave. NW,

Canton, Stark County, Ohio and failed to register the address as required.”

{¶9} Appellee, on April 13, 2010, entered an oral and written plea of not guilty

by reason of insanity.

{¶10} Thereafter, on June 11, 2010, appellant filed a superseding indictment in

the case sub judice. The indictment also charged appellee with one count of failure to

provide written notice of residence address change in violation of R.C. 2950.05(A)(E)(1)

and 2950.99(A) and indicated that appellee, having been classified a sexual predator,

had failed to provide written notice of a residence change to the Stark County Sheriff’s

Office at least twenty days prior to the change of address.

{¶11} On July 7, 2010, appellee filed a Motion to Dismiss. Appellee, in his

motion, alleged that the offense for which he was charged was based upon a version of

a statute [R.C. 2950.05] which was found to be unconstitutional by the Ohio Supreme Stark County App. Case No. 2010CA00242 4

Court in State v. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266, 2010-Ohio-2424, 933 N.E.2d 753.

According to appellee, “[b]ecause the prior versions of these Sections were repealed

effective January 1, 2008, and the latter version, including Defendant’s classification

was unlawful, they cannot serve as the predicates for the crimes for which he was

indicted.” Appellant filed a response to such motion on July 20, 2010.

{¶12} A hearing on appellee’s motion was held on July 26, 2010. Pursuant to a

Judgment Entry filed on August 19, 2010, the trial court granted appellee’s motion and

dismissed the indictment. The trial court, in its Judgment Entry, stated, in relevant part,

as follows:

{¶13} “The Defendant was classified as a sexual predator by an entry filed on

November 12, 1999, in case number, 1999CR1122. At that time, his duty to register a

change of address was at least 7 days prior to the change of resident’s address. The

Adam Walsh Act reclassified the Defendant as a Tier III offender and required him to

register at least 20 days prior to any change of resident’s address.

{¶14} “The Bill of Particulars in the instant case states, ‘On or about January 29,

2010, the defendant having been previously classified as a Tier III offender and being a

person required to notify the Stark County Sheriff’s Department of an address change at

twenty (20) days prior to said change.’ (See attached). State v. Buehner, 110 Ohio

St.3d 403, states ‘[T]here is no requirement that the indictment demonstrate the basis

for the grand jury’s findings. The bill of particulars serves this function.’ Therefore, the

Grand Jury charged the Defendant with violating the Adam Walsh Act. Based upon the

holdings in Smith and Bodyke, the Court grants Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss because

the Adam Walsh Act was found to be unconstitutional.” Stark County App. Case No. 2010CA00242 5

{¶15} Appellant now raises the following assignments of error on appeal:

{¶16} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN IT

DISMISSED THE SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT CHARGING APPELLEE WITH A

VIOLATION OF NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS AS A SEXUAL PREDATOR,

[R.C. 2950.05(A)(E)(1)]. FLUHARTY’S RECLASSIFICATION HAD NO BEARING ON

THE OUTCOME OF HIS PROSECUTION FOR FAILING TO NOTIFY THE SHERIFF

OF A CHANGE OF ADDRESS.

{¶17} “II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATER OF LAW IN FINDING

THAT THE BODYKE HOLDING BARRED THE SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT

CHARGING APPELLANT WITH FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE SHERIFF OF A CHANGE

OF ADDRESS BECAUSE BODYKE LEFT R.C. 2950.05 INTACT.

{¶18} “III. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW AND ABUSED

ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT DISMISSED THE SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT

BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL BILL OF PARTICULARS REFERRED TO APPELLEE AS A

TIER III OFFENDER.”

{¶19} For purposes of judicial economy, we shall address appellant’s

assignments of error out of sequence.

III

{¶20} Appellant, in its third assignment of error, argues that the trial court erred

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Fluharty
2012 Ohio 4258 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2011 Ohio 4074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-fluharty-ohioctapp-2011.