Monday, February 28, 2011

When is a knife a "deadly weapon"? (2 28 2011)

Ohio Revised Code Section 2923.11(A) defines a deadly weapon as "any instrument, device, or thing capable of inflicting death, and designed or specifically adapted for use as a weapon, or possessed, carried, or used as a weapon."

Not every knife is a "deadly weapon." Many knives would be considered "capable of inflicting death." But if the knife is not specifically adapted for use as a weapon OR is not possessed, carried, or used as a weapon, then the knife is not a "deadly weapon" in Ohio.

Here are some cites for cases discussing knives and whether or not they are deadly weapons: 2006-Ohio-2783, 2006-Ohio-833, 2003-Ohio-6248, and 2003-Ohio-2195.

Contact me if you need a Dayton Criminal Lawyer for your appeal or other post-conviction matter by going to my Web site www.robertalanbrenner.com and filling in the "contact me" form. Visit www.ohiocriminaltriallawyer.com if you need an experienced Dayton Criminal Defense Lawyer to represent you in the trial court.



Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Cop could not just read from ticket (2 22 2011)

An Ohio man was cited for failure to make a complete stop at a stop sign. He took it to trial and at the bench trial the officer testified by reading from the ticket. The defendant objected and the trial judge said the officer could refresh his memory with the ticket if he needed to. The man was convicted.

The court of appeals reversed the conviction because the trial judge erred by improperly allowing the officer to refresh his recollection in this manner. Ohio Evidence Rule 612 allows for a writing to be used by a witness to refresh their memory. But a proper foundation must be laid. First, it must be established that the witness lacks a present memory of the events described in the writing. Second, the witness may review the writing to see if the writing refreshes his recollection of the event. If so, he may then testify from his refreshed recollection.

In this case which you can read here, the trial court did not follow the procedure required by Evid. R. 612 and so the court of appeals reversed the conviction. City of Cleveland v. Schumann, 2011-Ohio-741.

Contact me if you need a Dayton Criminal Defense Lawyer for your appeal or other post-conviction matter by going to my Web site www.robertalanbrenner.com and filling in the "contact me" form.
Newer Posts Older Posts Home