State v. Powell
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 4923
Syllabus
The trial court did not err in overruling appellant's motion to dismiss a criminal charge of violating a protection order. The order was valid when the violation occurred. The domestic relations court had subject matter jurisdiction over the matter; therefore, its order was not void ab initio. Although the court later vacated the protection order upon learning that the parties were not family or household members, this fact did not affect the court's authority to issue the order. During the time the protection order was in effect, appellant was required to obey it and failed to do so. As a result, appellant was properly found guilty of violating the order. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Welbaum
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State ex rel. Tubbs Jones v. SusterOhio Supreme Court· 1998-12-02· cited 504×
- Morrison v. SteinerOhio Supreme Court· 1972-12-06· cited 306×
- Girard v. Giordano (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2018-12-18· cited 47×
- State v. ParsonOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-02-24· cited 37×
- Brookbank v. GrayOhio Supreme Court· 1996-01-17· cited 23×
- State ex rel. Reynolds v. KirbyOhio Supreme Court· 2023-03-16· cited 17×
- Pula v. Pula-BranchOhio Supreme Court· 2011-06-22· cited 15×
- State v. PhippsOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-04-08· cited 6×
- State v. LawrenceOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-11-04· cited 5×
- State ex rel. Dewine v. Washington C.H.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2014-08-18· cited 3×
- State v. YBarraOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-09-01· cited 3×
- Rocky River v. BakosOhio Court of Appeals· 2015-10-22· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.