Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 29, 1928PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMauck, J.

The offense charged is one defined by Section 13008 GC. The contention of the plaintiff in error here is that the verdict is in violation of Section 13008-1 GC. It becomes necessary, therefore, to ascertain what the purpose and effect of this supplementary section is.

The effect of the statute was simply, this, that whereas formerly the state had to prove the ability of the accused in order to convict, under the new statute the accused who fails to support his child can only avoid conviction by affirmatively proving his inability to support it. The change, therefore, simply changed the burden…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. DuceyOhio Court of Appeals · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API