Legal Opinion

City of Dayton v. Smith

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 23, 2018No. 27535PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWelbaum, P.J.

*903 {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Johniecsa Smith, appeals from her conviction in the Dayton Municipal Court, following a bench trial, for one count of failing to control her dogs in violation of section 91.50(A)(5) of the Dayton Revised Code of General Ordinances ("R.C.G.O."). In support of her appeal, Smith contends that her conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence. Smith also contends that the language in R.C.G.O. 91.50(D)(2), which sets forth an affirmative defense to a violation of R.C.G.O. 91.50(A)(5), is unconstitutionally vague. For the reasons outlined below, the judgment…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State v. MartinOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. State v. DehassOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Smith v. GoguenSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. State v. AwanOhio Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. Mieczkowsk, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District, Jefferson County2018
  2. State v. CantrelOhio Court of Appeals · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API