Case Summaries: Criminial - Temporary Protection Orders

Conviction For A TPO Violation Overturned Because of Improper Service On Incarcerated Defendant

The court of appeals reversed the Defendants conviction and sentence on one count of violating a criminal TPO because the state did not demonstrate that the protection order was issued and served in compliance with the due process requirements of R.C. 2919.26. Specifically, the service acknowledgment for the TPO merely stated via jail in the space designated for the Defendants signature. The state did not introduce evidence explaining the significance of the notation, or any extrinsic evidence demonstrating actual service upon the defendant at the jail or anywhere else in strict accordance with the statute. Additionally, the courts entry of plea indicated that the court explained to the Defendant that the TPO would remain in effect until sentencing, but it did not advise Defendant of the terms of the TPO at that time. State v. Mohabir, 2005 WL 66484, 2005-Ohio-78 (5th Dist., Fairfield, 1/07/2005).

Keywords: "temporary protection orders"

Date: 4/1/2005

Ohio v. Conkle

REQUIRED APPEARANCE AT TPO HEARING: Domestic violence TPO reversed after petitioner--without a medical condition or injury resulting from the domestic violence offense--did not appear at the TPO hearing as required by O.R.C. 2919.26(C)(1). Appearance is mandatory unless the petitioner is unable because of hospitalization or a medical condition that resulted from the domestic violence offense. Where the above conditions exist, another person who can inform the court may appear for the petitioner. Ohio v. Conkle, No. 03 CA 8 (Knox, 5th Dist., 5/9/03).

Keywords: temporary protection order,required to appear,medical excuse,excuse

Date: 1/12/2004