City of Cincinnati v. Robben
Ohio Court of Appeals
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
- State v. BridgemanOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Erdman v. MestrovichOhio Supreme Court · 1951
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. Hill, 07ap-889 (8-21-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. FyffeOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
- State v. TinchOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
- Manning v. WilmotOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.