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. Frederick

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Wayne

September 3, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Appellee
v.
ANTHONY FREDERICK Appellant

          APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE WAYNE COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT COUNTY OF WAYNE, OHIO CASE No. 2018 TR-D 5020

          WESLEY A. JOHNSTON, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.

          DANIEL R. LUTZ, Prosecuting Attorney, and ANDREA D. UHLER, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          DONNA J. CARR, JUDGE.

         {¶1} Appellant, Anthony Frederick, appeals the judgment of the Wayne County Municipal Court. This Court affirms.

         I.

         {¶2} This matter arises out of a traffic stop that occurred in Wooster, Ohio, on May 22, 2018. As a result of the stop, Frederick was charged with driving under a 12-point suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.037(J) and driving under a Financial Responsibility Act ("FRA") suspension in violation of R.C. 4510.16. The State amended the charge of driving under a 12-point suspension to failure to reinstate a license in violation of R.C. 4510.21. Frederick pleaded not guilty to the charges at arraignment.

         {¶3} The matter proceeded to a bench trial. Frederick invoked his right to self-representation. The trial court found Frederick guilty of driving under an FRA suspension. The charge of failure to reinstate a license was dismissed. The trial court imposed upon Frederick a $250 fine and assessed two points to his license.

         {¶4} On appeal, Frederick raises two assignments of error.

         II.

         ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I

         THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING DEFENDANT FOR DRIVING UNDER FRA SUSPENSION BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE WAS INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN A FINDING OF GUILT.

         {¶5} In his first assignment of error, Frederick contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to convict him of driving under an FRA suspension. This Court disagrees.

         {¶6} When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court must review the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether the evidence before the trial court was sufficient to ...


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.