State v. Horn, Unpublished Decision (10-17-2001)
State v. Horn, Unpublished Decision (10-17-2001)
Opinion of the Court
Defendant-appellant, Clifford Horn, appeals the judgment of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas imposing drug-testing as a condition of community control. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
In January 2001, Horn entered a guilty plea to a single count of nonsupport of a dependent pursuant to R.C.
In a single assignment of error, Horn argues that the trial court erred in ordering drug-testing as a condition of community control. We find no merit in the assignment. A trial court has broad discretion in determining the conditions of community control, and its decision regarding such condition will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.1
In the case at bar, we cannot say that the drug-testing condition was an abuse of discretion. First, we note that "[a] term of drug and alcohol use monitoring, including random drug testing" is specifically permitted as a nonresidential community-control sanction pursuant to R.C.
Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.
Doan, P.J. Hildebrandt and Sundermann, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.