State v. Wagoner, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2006)

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Wagoner, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2006)

2006 Ohio 3760

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 21, 2006

DocketC.A. No. 21225.

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2006 Ohio 3760 (State v. Wagoner, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2006)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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State v. Wagoner, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2006), 2006 Ohio 3760 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION {¶ 1} Ricky Wagoner appeals from his conviction of domestic violence in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) with one prior conviction for the same offense. The indictment charged Wagoner with knowingly causing or attempting to cause harm to a family or household member, to wit Mary Owens, to whom he was not married. There is no evidence in this record that she was his former spouse.

{¶ 2} Wagoner moved to dismiss the indictment claiming the statute was unconstitutional after the passage of the Marriage Amendment, Art. XV, Section 11 of the Ohio Constitution. The trial court overruled his motion, Wagoner entered his no contest plea, was sentenced, and this appeal followed. In a single assignment, Wagoner contends the statute as applied to him in this case is unconstitutional. We agree. See State v. Karen S.Ward (March 24, 2006), Greene App. No. 05-CA-75. The assignment of error is sustained. The Judgment of the trial court is Reversed.

Grady, P.J., Brogan, J., and Wolff, J., concur.

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

OPINION {¶ 1} Ricky Wagoner appeals from his conviction of domestic violence in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) with one prior conviction for the same offense. The indictment charged Wagoner with knowingly causing or attempting to cause harm to a family or household member, to wit Mary Owens, to whom he was not married. There is no evidence in this record that she was his former spouse.

{¶ 2} Wagoner moved to dismiss the indictment claiming the statute was unconstitutional after the passage of the Marriage Amendment, Art. XV, Section 11 of the Ohio Constitution. The trial court overruled his motion, Wagoner entered his no contest plea, was sentenced, and this appeal followed. In a single assignment, Wagoner contends the statute as applied to him in this case is unconstitutional. We agree. See State v. Karen S.Ward (March 24, 2006), Greene App. No. 05-CA-75. The assignment of error is sustained. The Judgment of the trial court is Reversed.

Grady, P.J., Brogan, J., and Wolff, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2006 Ohio 3760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wagoner-unpublished-decision-7-21-2006-ohioctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack