Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Taylor

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

August 14, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
MARTIGUS CARMEL TAYLOR Appellant

          APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR-2017-11-3961

          JEFFREY N. JAMES, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.

          SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN DIMARTINO, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          TEODOSIO, PRESIDING JUDGE.

         {¶1} Appellant, Martigus C. Taylor, appeals from his convictions in the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.

         I.

         {¶2} Mr. Taylor and the victim ("CD.") were in an on-and-off relationship over the span of several years. The relationship had ended in June of 2017, yet Mr. Taylor visited CD. at her home in Akron on the night of October 26, 2017, despite the existence of a civil protection order ("CPO") against him. CD. allowed Mr. Taylor into her home, but the two soon began arguing over Mr. Taylor's allegations of CD's sexual involvement with a minor. At some point, the two engaged in sexual intercourse. A physical altercation later occurred, in which CD. sustained various injuries, and the police were called to the scene.

         {¶3} Following a jury trial, Mr. Taylor was found guilty of domestic violence, a felony of the third degree, and violating a protection order, a misdemeanor of the first degree. The trial court ordered a pre-sentence investigation report with victim impact statement. The court later sentenced Mr. Taylor to two years in prison for domestic violence and 180 days in jail for violating a protection order, to be served concurrently with each other.

         {¶4} Mr. Taylor appeals from his convictions and raises two assignments of error for our review. For ease of analysis, we will reorganize his assignments of error.

         II.

         ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR TWO

APPELLANT'S CONVICTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.

         {¶5} In his second assignment of error, Mr. Taylor argues that his domestic violence conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence. We disagree.

         {¶6} This ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.