[Cite as State v. Cheatham, 2019-Ohio-122.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 28859 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE JONATHAN CHEATHAM COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO Appellant CASE No. CR-2017-05-1528 DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY Dated: January 16, 2019 HENSAL, Judge. {¶1} Jonathan Cheatham appeals a judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. For the following reasons, this Court affirms. I. {¶2} The Grand Jury indicted Mr. Cheatham on one count of having weapons while under disability. Mr. Cheatham moved to dismiss the indictment because the predicate for the offense was that he had been adjudicated a delinquent child for committing an offense that would have been a felony offense of violence. After the trial court denied his motion, Mr. Cheatham pleaded no contest to the charge. The trial court found him guilty, and sentenced him to two years of community control. Mr. Cheatham has appealed, assigning as error that the trial court incorrectly denied his motion to dismiss. II ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR 2 THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING APPELLANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE CHARGE OF HAVING WEAPONS WHILE UNDER DISABILITY WHEN A JUVENILE DELINQUENCY ADJUDICATION WAS USED AS A PREDICATE OFFENSE TO PROVE AN ELEMENT OF A SUBSEQUENT ADULT FELONY OFFENSE. {¶3} Mr. Cheatham argues that his juvenile adjudication could not impose a disability on him for purposes of Revised Code Section 2923.13. That section provides in relevant part that, “[u]nless relieved from disability * * *, no person shall knowingly acquire, have, carry, or use any firearm or dangerous ordnance, if * * * [t]he person * * * has been adjudicated a delinquent child for the commission of an offense that, if committed by an adult, would have been a felony offense of violence.” R.C. 2923.13(A)(2). According to Mr. Cheatham, because a juvenile adjudication is not a criminal conviction, it would violate his right to due process if it was allowed to create a legal disability. {¶4} We stayed this action pending the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Carnes, Slip Opinion No. 2017-0087, 2018-Ohio-3256. In Carnes, the Court considered “whether using a prior juvenile adjudication of delinquency for the commission of an offense that would have been felonious assault if it had been committed by an adult as an element of the offense of having a weapon under disability as set forth in R.C. 2923.13(A)(2) violates due process.” Id. at ¶ 1. That is the same issue as the one Mr. Cheatham has raised. The Ohio Supreme Court concluded that there was no due process violation because the State may impose restrictions on who may possess firearms and the legislature has created a process through which a person may seek relief from the disability. Id. at 11-12. Accordingly, we must reject Mr. Cheatham’s argument. Id. at ¶ 21. {¶5} Mr. Cheatham also argues that juvenile adjudications are not sufficiently reliable to be ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals