Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga
Criminal Appeal from the Lyndhurst Municipal Court Case No.
W. Taylor, for appellee.
Berkman, Gordon, Murray & DeVan, and William Livingston,
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
RAYMOND C. HEADEN, J.
1} Defendant-appellant C.C. ("C.C.")
appeals his conviction for violating a protection order. For
the reasons that follow, we affirm his conviction, vacate his
180-day suspended prison term, and remand.
and Substantive History
2} C.C.'s wife, Y.H., filed a petition seeking a
domestic violence civil protection order against C.C. in the
Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court. On May 1, 2018, the
court issued a protection order, listing Y.H. and each of the
couple's three minor children as protected persons. The
order prohibited C.C. from having any contact with any of the
protected persons, including by way of text messages.
3} On May 22, 2018, a complaint was filed against
C.C. in the Lyndhurst Municipal Court alleging that he
violated a protection order, in violation of R.C. 2919.27.
Y.H. filed the complaint upon receiving text messages sent to
her from C.C. on May 21, 2018.
4} On June 13, 2018, C.C. was arraigned and pleaded
5} A bench trial was held on August 15, 2018. The
city called Y.H. and Detective David Schiaciano
("Detective Schiaciano") as witnesses. Y.H.
testified with the assistance of an interpreter that she
received text messages and reported them to the police on May
22, 2018. Screenshots of the text messages were admitted into
evidence, and Y.H. read the text messages into the record.
The substance of the messages referred multiple times to the
protection order and its no-contact provision. Detective
Schiaciano testified that the messages depicted communication
from C.C. to Y.H., and that law enforcement verified that the
messages came from a phone number associated with C.C. On
cross-examination, Detective Schiaciano confirmed that he did
not know for certain who was using the cell phone at the time
the messages were sent. C.C. was found guilty. The trial
court sentenced him to a suspended term of 180 days in jail
and ordered him to pay court costs and a $250 fine.
6} C.C. appeals, presenting three assignments of
error for our review.
7} In his first assignment of error, C.C. argues
that the charging instrument failed to put him on notice of
the charge and state an offense and, therefore, his
conviction is invalid. Specifically, he asserts that the
complaint failed to provide any information as to what order
was violated, ...