State v. Dixon, Unpublished Decision (3-31-2006)

Ohio Court of Appeals March 31, 2006

State v. Dixon, Unpublished Decision (3-31-2006), 2006 Ohio 1584 (2006)

PER CURIAM:

Dissenting Opinion

I disagree for reasons set forth in my dissent in State v.Ward.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION{¶ 1} The State of Ohio appeals from the trial court's dismissal of Jason Dixon's indictment for felonious assault. The victim of the alleged assault was Jessica Roth, Dixon's live-in girlfriend. The trial court found that R.C. 2919.25 was unconstitutional as a result of the recently enacted Marriage Amendment. The assault occurred on January 23, 2005. The Amendment was effective on December 2, 2004.

{¶ 2} We recently held that R.C. 2919.25 is unconstitutional as it relates to cohabiting partners pursuant to the Marriage Amendment, Article XV, Sec. 11 of the Ohio Constitution. SeeState v. Karen Ward, Greene App. No. 05-CA-75.

{¶ 3} The appellant's assignment of error is Overruled.

{¶ 4} The judgment of the trial court is Affirmed.

Brogan, J. and Fain, J., concur.

Reference

Full Case Name: State of Ohio v. Jason Adam Dixon
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Unpublished