From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re R.A.H.

Supreme Court of Ohio.
Nov 3, 2016
2016 Ohio 7592 (Ohio 2016)

Opinion

No. 2015–1610.

11-03-2016

In re R.A.H.

Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Brooke M. Burns, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, R.A.H.


Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Brooke M. Burns, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, R.A.H.

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals as to proposition of law No. I is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals to apply In re A.G., 148 Ohio St.3d 118, 2016-Ohio-3306, 69 N.E.3d 646.

{¶ 2} Proposition of law No. II of the appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted.

O'CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LANZINGER, FRENCH, and O'NEILL, JJ., concur.

O'DONNELL and KENNEDY, JJ., dissent and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in In re A.G.


Summaries of

In re R.A.H.

Supreme Court of Ohio.
Nov 3, 2016
2016 Ohio 7592 (Ohio 2016)
Case details for

In re R.A.H.

Case Details

Full title:In re R.A.H.

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio.

Date published: Nov 3, 2016

Citations

2016 Ohio 7592 (Ohio 2016)
148 Ohio St. 3d 531
71 N.E.3d 1015

Citing Cases

In re D.R.

{¶15} We note that this case is distinguishable from the Eighth Appellate District cases of In re D.C., 8th…

In re D.F.

{¶33} Because any presumption of a high risk to reoffend is a rebuttable one, we reject D.F.'s contention…