Legal Opinion

City of Middletown v. Hollon

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 29, 2004No. CA2003-04-083PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Powell, Judge.

(¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Frank Hollon, appeals from his convictions in Middletown Municipal Court for disorderly conduct, obstructing official business, and resisting arrest. We affirm appellant’s convictions for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest but reverse appellant’s conviction for obstructing official business.

{¶ 2} On December 11, 2002, Officer Quick of the Middletown Police Department was dispatched to appellant’s neighborhood due to reports that two dogs were running loose. Upon arriving at the scene, Officer Quick observed two large dogs “tearing up the trash” at…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. United States v. SantanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. State v. CarterOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Sheehy v. Town of PlymouthCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. GriceOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
  2. State v. ButtramOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  3. State v. FlorenceOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. State v. PierceOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Brooklyn v. KaczorOhio Court of Appeals · 2013

5 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