Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Carswell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 2007No. 2006-0151Published

1DissentLanzinger, J.

{¶ 38} Because of an understandable need to uphold the domestic violence statute as it is currently written and to avoid the unintended consequences that result from the passage of Section 11, Article XV of the Ohio Constitution, the majority misinterprets the amendment, thus saving the statute from being declared unconstitutional. I respectfully dissent.

{¶ 39} The disputed portion of Section 11, Article XV is the second sentence, which says: “This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. JordanOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State v. Douglas, Unpublished Decision (5-11-2006)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API