Legal Opinion
State v. Dean
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided January 12, 2007No. C-050971PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
Sylvia S. Hendon, Judge.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Gordon Dean, received a citation for improper solicitation in violation of Cincinnati Municipal Code (“C.M.C.”) 910-12. Dean filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that C.M.C. 910-12 was unconstitutional. The trial court upheld the constitutionality of the ordinance and found Dean guilty of its violation. Dean has appealed to this court, and in his sole assignment of error he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss due to the unconstitutionality of C.M.C. 910-12.
C.M.C. 910-12
{¶ 2} C.M.C. 910-12, titled “Improper…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ward v. Rock Against RacismSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. ButtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. BoehlerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2011