Legal Opinion

City of Cincinnati v. Robben

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 8, 1982No. C-811039PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant-appellant, Anthony Robben, moved for acquittal under Crim. R. 29(A) at the conclusion of the state’s evidence in the trial of a charge that defendant violated Cincinnati’s assured-clear-distance-ahead ordinance, Cincinnati Municipal Code, Section 506-8 (1979). 1 The court overruled the motion and after defendant had presented his evidence, found him guilty as charged. The single assignment of error is that the court erred as a matter of law in failing to grant the motion “to dismiss.” We agree.

When a motion to acquit under Crim. R. 29(A) is overruled, the question is whether,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. BridgemanOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Erdman v. MestrovichOhio Supreme Court · 1951

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. Hill, 07ap-889 (8-21-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. State v. FyffeOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. State v. TinchOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Manning v. WilmotOhio Court of Appeals · 1985

3 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