State v. Scott Rose, Unpublished Decision (11-3-2000)
This text of State v. Scott Rose, Unpublished Decision (11-3-2000) (State v. Scott Rose, Unpublished Decision (11-3-2000)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.
Opinion
In his first assignment of error, Rose claims the trial court erred in convicting him of menacing, as it is not a lesser-included offense of domestic violence as defined in R.C.
The greater offense in this case, domestic violence, which requires proof that the offender "knowingly caus[ed] or attempt[ed] to cause physical harm," can be committed without simultaneously committing menacing, since a menacing offense requires proof that the offender "knowingly cause[d] another to believe that the offender [would] cause physical harm." (Emphasis added.)
We have held that domestic violence, as defined in R.C.
Our ruling on Rose's first assignment of error renders his second, third, fourth, and fifth assignments of error moot under App.R. 12(A)(1)(c).
Hildebrandt, P.J., Gorman and Painter, JJ._________________________ Per Curiam.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Scott Rose, Unpublished Decision (11-3-2000), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-scott-rose-unpublished-decision-11-3-2000-ohioctapp-2000.