Submitted November 21, 2017
from and Certified by the Court of Appeals for Lucas County,
No. L-15-1121, 2016-Ohio-4906.
Michael DeWine, Attorney General, Eric E. Murphy, State
Solicitor, Michael J. Hendershot, Chief Deputy Solicitor,
Hannah C. Wilson, Deputy Solicitor, and Halli Brownfield
Watson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellants.
1} The judgment of the court of appeals is vacated,
and the cause is remanded to the trial court for application
of Dayton v. State, Ohio St.3d, 2017-Ohio-6909,
O'CONNOR, C.J., and KLATT, FRENCH, and FISCHER, JJ.,
KENNEDY, J., dissents.
DEWINE, J., dissents, with an opinion joined by O'NEILL,
WILLIAM A. KLATT, J., of the Tenth Appellate District,
sitting for O'DONNELL, J.
DeWine, J., dissenting.
2} I dissent from the majority's decision to
vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand this
case to the trial court to apply this court's holding
in Dayton v. State, Ohio St.3d_,
2017-Ohio-6909, N.E.3d. The only majority holding in
Dayton is that R.C. 4511.093(B)(1), 4511.095, and
4511.0912 are unconstitutional; the majority was fractured as
to the reasoning behind the holding, with no position
garnering support from four justices. Id. at ¶
46 (French, J., concurring).
3} The lack of a majority view means there is no
guidance to be gleaned from Dayton-the decision adds
nothing but more confusion to our general-law jurisprudence.
The trial court is in no better position now than when it
first heard the case to determine the constitutionality of
the provisions it previously addressed that were not
addressed by this court in Dayton. Dayton addressed
only three discrete provisions of 2014 Am.Sub.S.B. No. 342;
numerous others were reviewed by the trial and appellate
courts in this case. The provisions not addressed by this
court in Dayton, but at issue in the courts below
• R.C. 4511.093(B)(3), which allows municipalities to
issue tickets based upon evidence recorded by traffic
cameras, but only if they comply with state-mandated
• R.C. 4511.096(A), which requires that a "law
enforcement officer employed by a municipality" examine
traffic-camera-photo evidence to determine whether a
• R.C. 4511.096(B), which makes the fact that a person
is the registered owner of a vehicle prima facie evidence
that the person was operating the ...