State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001)

DecidedDecember 12, 2001

DocketAppeal No. C-010430, Trial No. B-722429.

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001) (State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001), (Ohio Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

JUDGMENT ENTRY. This appeal, considered on the accelerated calendar under App.R. 11.1(E) and Loc.R. 12, is not controlling authority except as provided in S.Ct.R.Rep.Op. 2(G)(1).

Plaintiff-appellant, the state of Ohio, appeals from the June 6, 2001, order of the trial court granting defendant-appellee Sandra Howze's application for expungement of her criminal record. The record reflects that, in 1971, Howze was convicted of welfare fraud, and that, in 1972, she was convicted of drug possession. The sole assignment of error is well taken, as Howze was not a "first offender" within the meaning of the statute authorizing expungement for first offenders, and the trial court did not have jurisdiction to grant the expungement.¹

Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.

Doan, P.J., Hildebrandt and Winkler, JJ.

¹ See R.C. 2953.31; State v. Coleman (1997), 117 Ohio App.3d 726,691 N.E.2d 369.

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

JUDGMENT ENTRY. This appeal, considered on the accelerated calendar under App.R. 11.1(E) and Loc.R. 12, is not controlling authority except as provided in S.Ct.R.Rep.Op. 2(G)(1).

Plaintiff-appellant, the state of Ohio, appeals from the June 6, 2001, order of the trial court granting defendant-appellee Sandra Howze's application for expungement of her criminal record. The record reflects that, in 1971, Howze was convicted of welfare fraud, and that, in 1972, she was convicted of drug possession. The sole assignment of error is well taken, as Howze was not a "first offender" within the meaning of the statute authorizing expungement for first offenders, and the trial court did not have jurisdiction to grant the expungement.¹

Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.

Doan, P.J., Hildebrandt and Winkler, JJ.

¹ See R.C. 2953.31; State v. Coleman (1997), 117 Ohio App.3d 726,691 N.E.2d 369.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Howze, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2001), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-howze-unpublished-decision-12-12-2001-ohioctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack