2017
State v. Smith, 9th Dist. Wayne No. 15AP0001, 2017-Ohio-359. Defendant was convicted for 44 counts of animal cruelty under R.C. 959.131(C) for not providing adequate care, and Defendant appealed on search and seizure issues. However, the initial search was done by a private citizen and therefore the assignment of error was overruled.
2016
State v. Rawson, 2016-Ohio-1403, 62 N.E.3d 880 (10th Dist.). Convicted under R.C. 959.131(B) and (C) for omission of proper medical care to a companion animal, Defendant argued that the statutes are unconstitutionally vague. However, the court ruled that the statutes are sufficiently clear to define the prohibited conduct.
2015
Dunn v. Licking Cnty. Humane Soc’y, 5th Dist. Licking No. 14-CA-101, 2015-Ohio-2561. Plaintiff gave nine dogs to a third party (Magers) for artificial insemination. One of the dogs gave birth to ten puppies worth approximately $1,500 each. However, all the dogs and puppies where taken by the Humane Society because Magers was keeping them in unsanitary condition in violation of R.C. 959.131. Plaintiff had no knowledge of this because she transferred the dogs to Magers in another location (off her property). Plaintiff was able to get the nine dogs from the Human Society because she could prove ownership. However, the ten puppies where adopted out. Plaintiff sued for conversion, succeeded at the trial court level, but the court of appeals reversed because the Humane Society enjoys immunity under R.C. 2744.02.
State v. Beck, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2014-P-0050, 2015-Ohio-1069. Defendant had twenty animals, including three husky dogs, seized from her home and was found guilty under R.C. 959.131 for cruelty to animals because they were kept in unsanitary conditions and malnourished.
State v. Bridge, 6th Dist. Lucas No. L-14-1204, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4402. Defendant was keeping two dogs in a filthy kennel with a dead dog and was found to be in violation of R.C. 959.131(C)(2).
State v. Johnson, 5th Dist. Licking No. 14-CA-54, 2015-Ohio-1110. While driving sixty-two dogs in a minivan to a rescue facility, Defendants’ vehicle broke down. They were found guilty under R.C. 959.131(A)(3), which was upheld as a constitutional statute.
State v. Sherman, 6th Dist. Lucas No. L-14-1060, 2015-Ohio-3299. Defendant found a stray cat that was badly wounded but could not afford immediate treatment at the animal hospital. The hospital advised her to call the humane society because delaying treatment would be cruel. Defendant refused to call the humane society because she was afraid the cat would be killed. Defendant was convicted by the trial level court under R.C. 959.131(B), however, the appellate court overruled because she was not guilty of an act of torture, but an act of omission and should have been charged under R.C. 959.131(C)(2) instead.
State v. Smith, Union C.P. No. 2015-CR-0030, 2015 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 4812 (May 26, 2015). Defendant was not a citizen of the United States and plead guilty to a violation of R.C. 959.131 along with other violations.
State v. Powell, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 14AP-1054, 2015-Ohio-4459. Defendant neglected her dog by refusing to get it medical treatment even though it showed clear signs of serious illness. Therefore, she was found guilty under R.C. 959.131(C)(2).
2014
State v. Dye, 5th Dist. Holmes No. CRB-13-055, 2014-Ohio-2547. A dog warden seized 72 dogs from Defendant which were being confined in a manner inconsistent with R.C. 959.13(A)(4). They were in cages with a large buildup of feces and urine. A motion to suppress evidence was filed by the Defendant and denied.
State v. Farmer, 12th Dist. Butler No. CA2013-06-097, 2014-Ohio-3079. Defendant’s dog was starved, dehydrated, and exposed during winter months, so he was convicted under R.C. 959.131(B). His conviction was ruled as not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
State v. Morgan, 12th Dist. Butler Nos. CA2013-08-146, CA2013-08-147, 2014-Ohio-2472. Defendants were convicted under R.C. 959.13(A)(1) for depriving their horse of the necessary amounts of food and water. The search warrant was found to be properly issued, and their motion to suppress the evidence was denied.
State v. Sullivan, 12th Dist. Butler No. CA2013-05-086, 2014-Ohio-1687. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.131(C)(2) because her dog was given inadequate food, water, and shelter. She was also convicted under R.C. 955.21 because she failed to register the dog.
2013
State v. Bodnar, 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 12-MA-77, 2013-Ohio-1115. Defendant was convicted for cruelty to her dog. She claimed on appeal that her testimony was cut short, but the appellate court disagreed.
State v. Field, 11th Dist. Geauga No. 2012-G-3082, 2013-Ohio-2257. Defendant entered a guilty plea for cruelty to animals (pigs and horses) for not providing them with adequate food and water. He appealed his guilty plea because he claimed he made the plea unknowingly, but the appellate court upheld his sentence anyway.
State v. Helmbright, 10th Dist. Franklin Nos. 11AP-1080, 11AP-1081, 2013-Ohio-1143. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.131(C)(2) for failing to find proper medical treatment for his cats with respiratory infections and for underfeeding the others.
State v. Schormuller, 11th Dist. Lake No. 2012-L-124, 2013-Ohio-2043. Defendant’s companion animals were seized due to neglect. She tried to have them returned to her, but they were already given away by the Humane Society. Therefore, the case was moot.
2012
City of Mansfield v. Studder, 5th Dist. Richland Nos. 2011-CA-93, 2011-CA-94, 2012-Ohio-4840. Defendant was convicted for animal cruelty under R.C. 959.13(A)(4) because the animals lacked fresh air, sanitary conditions, and room to exercise. Her appeal to dismiss evidence because there was not probable cause for a search warrant was overruled.
State v. Hartman, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26250, 2012-Ohio-4694. Defendant was keeping an abundance of animals in her home in unsanitary conditions in violation of R.C. 959.131(C)(1). She appealed that the search of her home was warrantless, even though she told officers to enter the home in order to check on the animals. The court found that her consent was voluntary, so her assignment of error was overruled.
State v. Kidd, 7th Dist. Belmont No. 11-BE-33, 2012-Ohio-6094. Defendant plead guilty to counts of cruelty to companion animals for malnourishing them. She was not allowed to retain possession of her other animals, and on appeal, the court ruled in favor of the State.
2011
State v. Vess, 6th Dist. Ottawa No. OT-10-038, 2011-Ohio-3118. Defendant was found guilty for 42 counts of animal cruelty under R.C. 959.13(A)(1) for not feeding or watering her horses. Her appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel was overruled.
State v. Leslie, 4th Dist. Hocking Nos. 10CA17 and 10CA18, 2011-Ohio-2727. Defendants were convicted for not feeding or watering their farm animals under R.C. 959.13(A)(1). However, their restitution payments were overturned because the Humane Society was not considered a victim of the crime.
2009
City of Strongsville v. Eskander, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92448, 2009-Ohio-5370. Two dead dogs were found on Defendant’s property, and the trial court found him guilty under R.C. 959.131(B). However, the appellate court overturned the decision because Plaintiff did not prove that Defendant knew of any neglect to the dogs. Further, the dogs had been dead for over four months, and Plaintiff could not prove how the dogs had died.
State v. Ham, 3rd Dist. Wyandot No. 16-09-01, 2009-Ohio-3822. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.131(A)(1) for underfeeding her dog. However, she was not required to pay restitution to the humane society, because they were not considered a victim of her crime.
State v. Silbaugh, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2008-P-0059, 2009-Ohio-1489. Defendant was convicted for malnourishing her horses and was ordered to pay restitution to the APL as part of a stipulation agreement.
2008
State v. Brooks, 9th Dist. Medina No. 07-CA-0111-M, 2008-Ohio-3723. Defendant was found guilty under R.C. 959.13(A)(1) and (2) because she malnourished and inadequately sheltered her horses. On appeal, the court discussed R.C. 959.99 because the trial court ordered forfeiture of her cats and dogs even though the charges against her only involved her horses. The court found that her constitutional rights were not violated by this order.
State v. Hoffman, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 07AP-886, 2008-Ohio-6602. Defendant was found guilty for violating R.C. 959.13(A)(1) because his cows could not adequately get to their feeding area due to the deep mud on their traveling path. Four cows died because of the mud. The appellate court overruled his assignment of error that the conviction was based on insufficient evidence.
State v. Mangold, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2008-P-0033, 2008-Ohio-6406. Defendant was found guilty for one count of animal cruelty under R.C. 959.13(A)(1) since he was not feeding or adequately caring for his cows.
State v. Nichols, 4th Dist. Hocking No. 07AP10, 2008-Ohio-1327. Defendant owned horses which were malnourished, and he was convicted under R.C. 959.131(A)(1). His appeal that the ruling was against the manifest weight of the evidence was overruled.
2007
State v. Anello, 5th Dist. Stark No. 2006CA00340, 2007-Ohio-4822. Defendant owned dogs which were inadequately feed, watered, and housed. Although the officers didn’t have a search warrant, the court found they had exigent circumstances through the plain view, plain smell doctrine.
State v. Fisher, 5th Dist. Stark No. 2006CA00338, 2007-Ohio-4820. Defendant malnourished her dogs in violation of R.C. 959.13, and they were kept in unsanitary conditions. The appellate court agreed with the trial court that exigent circumstances existed, which enabled the officers to search the barn without a warrant.
State v. Martin, 5th Dist. Stark No. 2006CA00339, 2007-Ohio-4821. Defendant owned dogs that she kept in unsanitary conditions, without adequate food or water, and without socializing them. Her appeal that certain evidence should have been suppressed due to the lack of a search warrant was overruled because there were exigent circumstances.
2006
State v. Anderson, 5th Dist. Ashland No. 2005-COA-022, 2006-Ohio-510. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.13 for neglecting her horse. She appealed because she was never given a sworn copy of the complaint. The appellate court overruled this assignment of error because the officer issued a summons to her instead of making an arrest.
State v. Angus, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 05AP-1054, 2006-Ohio-4455. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.131(C)(2) for malnourishing his dogs. His appeal that he should not have to pay restitution to the Humane Society was found to have merit because they were not a victim of his crime. His sentencing, however, was not overturned.
State v. Davidson, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2005-P-0038, 2006-Ohio-1458. Defendant owned animals which she neglected and was convicted under R.C. 959.131(A)(1). Plaintiff mistakenly tried to charge her with violating R.C. 959.131(C)(1) which does not exist. The appellate court allowed the conviction to stand because Defendant was not prejudiced by this mistake.
State v. Dixon, 6th Dist. Huron No. H-05-021, 2006-Ohio-2114. Defendant was convicted of malnourishing her horse in violation of R.C. 959.13(A)(1). On appeal, the court found that she was indeed reckless in her neglect.
State v. Fry, 2nd Dist. Clark No. 2006-CA-14, 2006-Ohio-4157. Defendant was charged with violating R.C. 959.131(C). The trial court suppressed the evidence because they found the affidavit for the search warrant to be lacking in probable cause. The appellate court agreed with this ruling. However, they allowed the search to stand since the warrant was very close to establishing probable cause, and the officer could not have known any better. Therefore, the trial court’s suppression of the evidence was overruled and the case was remanded.
State v. Hendrickson, 5th Dist. Ashland No. 05-COA-023, 2006-Ohio-434. Defendant neglected her cats and was convicted under R.C. 959.131(C). She then violated the terms of her probation period and thirteen cats were seized from her property. On appeal, the court agreed that R.C. 959.99 allowed her cats to be seized.
2005
City of Parma v. Takacs, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga Nos. 84867, 84868, 2005-Ohio-1319. A dog warden confiscated dogs that were living in unsanitary conditions, two of which were ordered by the Trial Court to be returned to the owner. The Appellate Court ruled that they should not be returned since Defendant did not comply with the necessary procedures to redeem the dogs.
State v. Hale, 7th Dist. Monroe No. 04 MO 14, 2005-Ohio-7080. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.13(A)(4) because he did not adequately exercise his dogs. He owned dozens of dogs and kept them in kennels without sufficient exercise. The court sanctioned him to owning no more than four animals. His appeal that this was improper was overruled via R.C. 959.99.
State v. Ray, 5th Dist. Tuscarawas No. 2005AP060040, 2005-Ohio-6061. Defendant was convicted under R.C. 959.131 and was sanctioned to owning only ten dogs. On appeal, the court said that under R.C. 959.99, this sanction was allowable.
2003
Patton v. Wood Cty. Humane Soc’y, 154 Ohio App.3d 670, 2003-Ohio-5200, 798 N.E.2d 676 (6th Dist.) Plaintiff was keeping farm animals without shelter in the winter. The humane society said he could keep the farm animals if he built shelter and gave his dogs to them. Plaintiff agreed, then later claimed that he was coerced. The appellate court disagreed and overruled his assignments of error.
2002
Earl v. Wood County Humane Soc’y, 6th Dist. Wood No. WD-01-061, 2002-Ohio-3156. Defendant was tried for animal cruelty for neglecting his dog, but was found innocent of the charges. The trial court demanded that the humane society pay for his attorney’s fees. However, the appellate court found that the humane society has immunity, and therefore, reversed the judgment regarding attorney’s fees.
State v. Payne, 149 Ohio App. 3d, 2002-Ohio-5180, 777 N.E.2d 333 (7th Dist.). Defendant was convicted for animal cruelty because she did not feed, clean, or exercise her horses. Even though the judge, prior to the trial, joked of being in a “convicting mood”, the appellate court found that Defendant’s due process rights were not violated, and therefore, they did not reverse the decision.
State v. Peters, 7th Dist. Belmont No. 01-BA-57, 2002-Ohio-6094. Defendant’s dog was extremely emaciated, and she was convicted of cruelty to a companion animal. The appellate court ruled that the decision was not against the manifest weight of the evidence because she failed to seek any medical care and neglected her dog.
State v. Wright, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2000-P-0128, 2002-Ohio-1432. Defendant was convicted of starving her dog to death. On trying to call her boyfriend to the stand to testify on her behalf, the trial court refused to allow it because he was faced with similar charges and because his attorney was not present to give him counsel. The appellate court did not believe that the lack of his testimony affected the outcome of the case.
2001
State v. Myers, 9th Dist. Medina No. 3078-M, 2001 Ohio App. LEXIS 1581 (Apr. 4, 2001). Defendant was convicted of cruelty to animals, presumably because she neglected her farm animals. Furthermore, the appellate court upheld R.C. 2931.18 which allows the humane society to appoint a special prosecutor.
2000
State v. Brown, 5th Dist. Tuscarawas No. 1999AP090055, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 3025 (June 28, 2000). Defendant kept her rabbits in unsanitary conditions and did not feed adequately. Even though the affidavit for the search warrant contained errors, those errors set aside, there was still enough facts to establish probable cause.
State v. Chamberlain, 12th Dist. Madison No. CA99-01-003, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS (Jan. 31, 2000). Defendant owned a kennel and was keeping the dogs in bad conditions. Her appeal that she should be able to own a kennel during probation was overruled by the appellate court.
State v. Covey, 6th Dist. Lucas No. L-98-1173, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 2080 (May 19, 2000). Defendant was convicted for not providing proper care and medical attention to her birds and cats. The appellate court reversed the ruling that she should have to pay restitution to the humane society, but the rest of the ruling was upheld.
State v. Payne, 7th Dist. Harrison No. 00 521 CA, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 6236 (Dec. 19, 2000). Defendant was not properly informed of her rights when entering a guilty plea for neglecting her horse. Therefore, the appellate court allowed her to revoke her plea and enter in a new one. She was subsequently convicted in 2002.
Studer v. Seneca County Humane Soc’y, 3rd Dist. Seneca No. 13-99-59, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 1974 (May 4, 2000). Plaintiff was harboring over 150 stray cats and dogs and keeping them in deplorable conditions. The humane society seized the animals and Plaintiff was convicted for cruelty to animals. Plaintiff tried to get the humane society to return the animals that were not destroyed, said that her due process rights were violated, and demanded conversion. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the humane society on all counts based on immunity. The appellate court said that their immunity protected them from paying conversion but not from the question of violation of due process rights. Furthermore, Plaintiff was allowed to get the undestroyed animals back because, according to the trial court, she was allowed to keep one as a pet. The trial court also erred in not allowing Plaintiff to know who owned her animals.
1999
State v. Babcock, 11th Dist. Geauga No. 98-G-2144, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 3978 (Aug. 27, 1999). Defendant was convicted of animal cruelty because his dogs were kept in filthy cages and did not have access to clean water. On appeal, he argued that the State’s evidence of photographs and veterinary reports were irrelevant and should not have been admitted. The appeals court disagreed.
State v. Bybee, 731 N.E.2d 232 (1st. Dist. 1999). The State seized over one hundred animals that were underfed and neglected. Defendant was convicted for animal cruelty, and as a condition of her probation, she was ordered to pay over one hundred thousand dollars in restitution to the SPCA. The appellate court reversed the restitution decision because caring for animals does not qualify as property damage under R.C. 2929.21. This decision was analyzed by State v. Leslie (4th Dist. 2011), where the court cites R.C. 2929.28(A)(1) as the current statute governing restitution.
State v. Miller, 12th Dist. Butler No. CA98-06-129, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 5515 (Nov. 22, 1999). Defendant was convicted for underfeeding his emaciated horses. The appellate court overruled his argument that the search warrant was invalid. They made this ruling because he failed to mention this at the trial court level, and therefore, he could not make it on appeal.
State v. Studer, 3rd Dist. Seneca No. 13-98-46, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 1747 (Mar. 26, 1999). Defendant was convicted of animal cruelty because her dog was kept without proper exercise, change of air, and food.
State v. Donnelly, 5th Dist. Ashland No. 98 COA 01272, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 1485 (Feb. 22, 1999). Defendant was found guilty under R.C. 959.13 because she was keeping animals in deplorable conditions. Upon review, she was found to have been reckless.
1998
Garcia v. Bailey, 2nd Dist. Montgomery No. 16646, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 2649 (May 22, 1998). Plaintiffs were given a warning ticket for animal cruelty for the way they kept their dog while they were at work. The prosecutor dismissed the case because they agreed to keep the dog in different conditions. Plaintiffs then accused Defendant, the officer involved in the case, of malicious prosecution. The court ruled in favor of Defendant since he acted in a reasonable manner.
State v. Barker, 128 Ohio App. 3d 233, 714 N.E.2d 447 (6th Dist. 1998). Defendant owned a kennel where the dogs were matted, underweight, and unkempt. She was ordered to forfeit all the dogs in the kennel as a condition of probation.
State v. Kilburn, 12th Dist. Warren Nos. CA96-12-130, CA96-12-131, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 1200 (Mar. 30, 1998). An officer saw a horse stuck in the mud and went to pull it out. From there, he could see dead goats and other signs of animal neglect. The court ruled that this allowed him to search the rest of the property. The Defendants were convicted and ordered to give up their animals as a condition of probation.
State v. Vasquez, 6th Dist. Fulton No. F-97-026 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 2389 (Jun. 5, 1998). Defendant was found guilty for animal cruelty because his dogs were underweight and kept in an unkempt environment. The appellate court outlined the requirements to be met by conditions of probation and found that the forfeiture of his dogs was a reasonable condition.
1997
State v. Bartlett, 11th Dist. Trumbull No. 96-T-5459, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 1790 (May 2, 1997). Defendant was convicted of animal cruelty. On appeal, the condition of probation that she forfeit her animals was upheld. However, the restitution she owed to the humane society was reversed because it exceeded the amount of $750 stated in the statute.
State v. Bergen, 121 Ohio App. 3d 459, 700 N.E.2d 345 (1st. Dist. 1997). Defendant left his dog on a leash within reach of adequate food, water, and shade and left for vacation. When he came home, the dog had died and an officer was there. The dog had wrapped the leash around a small tree and could not reach the shade, thereby dying from overheating. He had left the dog like that numerous times without problems, did not think the tree posed a threat, and loved the dog. Therefore, the appellate court overruled the trial court’s conviction because they could not prove recklessness.
State v. Dresbach, 122 Ohio App. 3d 647, 702 N.E.2d 513 (10th Dist. 1997). Defendant underfed his dog and was convicted under R.C. 959.13(A)(1).
State v. Hammaker, 12th Dist. Preble No. CA97-02-004, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 4839 (Nov. 3, 1997). Defendant deprived his twelve horses of adequate food and water.
State v. York, 122 Ohio App. 3d 226, 701 N.E.2d 463 (11th Dist. 1997). Defendant owned a pony which was in very poor condition. An officer approached a barn, heard a moan, and could see the emaciated pony. Although she did not have a search warrant, and the barn was considered curtilage, Defendant’s did not take adequate care to conceal the pony from plain view.
1996
State v. Sheets, 112 Ohio App. 3d 1, 677 N.E.2d 818 (4th Dist. 1996). Defendant did not give adequate food and water to his horses and was convicted on ten counts. The humane society took all 122 of his horses, and the appellate court stated that this was legitimate as a condition of probation.
State v. Stevenson, 9th Dist. Wayne No. 95CA0036, 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 1911 (May 5, 1996). Defendant was convicted for not giving her animals adequate change of air and nutrition.
1995
City of Akron v. Donnelly, 9th Dist. Summit No. 16821, 1995 Ohio App. LEXIS 699 (Feb. 22, 1995). Defendant was convicted for not providing his horse with sufficient food, and he was found to have been reckless in doing so.
1994
State v. Stevenson, 9th Dist. Wayne No. 2855-W, 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 3919 (Aug. 31, 1994). Defendant’s dogs were seized and she was convicted of cruelty to animals because they were mistreated and underfed. The court found that she had entered an oral contract with the humane society to keep her dogs for ten dollars per day. Therefore, the court said that the humane society had a possessory lien on the dogs.
1993
State v. McClure, 12th Dist. Warren No. CA93-01-007, 1993 Ohio App. LEXIS 5034 (Oct. 18, 1993). Defendant locked a cat and two kittens in a vehicle on a hot day for half an hour without access to water. The veterinarian testified that they would have died within an hour, but the police officers removed them from the vehicle while the Defendant was away. She was convicted for three counts of cruelty to animals.