Legal Opinion

City of Washington Court House v. McStowe

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 3, 1976No. 75-614PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

Due process of law protects an accused against conviction except upon “proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged.” In re Winship (1970), 397 U. S. 358, 364. A penal statute or ordinance, pursuant to which one is charged, must be interpreted and applied strictly against the accuser, and liberally in favor of the accused. Mentor v. Giordano (1967), 9 Ohio St. 2d 140; State v. Conley (1947), 147 Ohio St. 351; State v. Meyers (1897), 56 Ohio St. 340.*

Ordinance No. 45-72 proscribes a person’s being “found in” a “home, place, room or…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. City of Mentor v. GiordanoOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Greenhills Home Owners Corp. v. Village of GreenhillsOhio Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Rucker v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Village of Strongsville v. McPheeOhio Supreme Court · 1944

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  2. State v. HardyOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
  3. State v. EnglishOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. State v. WilsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. State v. WeissmanOhio Supreme Court · 1982

2 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