Legal Opinion

City of Columbus v. Taylor

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 26, 1988No. 87-1151PublishedCited by 69 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.

The primary issue presented in this action is whether appellee’s conviction for violating Section 2133.01(b)(2) of the Columbus City Code was proper. We hold that he was properly convicted and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and reinstate the judgment of the trial court.

By final judgment entry of the trial court, appellee was convicted and sentenced for violating Section 2133.01 (b)(2).2 Under this per se offense, the prosecution in order to sustain a conviction must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was operating a vehicle within the city and that…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. LytleOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Berman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  3. State v. VegaOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Ojalvo v. Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. State v. TannerOhio Supreme Court · 1984

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by69 opinions

  1. State v. ClayOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
  2. Feichtner v. Ohio Department of TransportationOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. State v. Patrick (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Renfro v. BlackOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. Craig (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020

64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API