Yesterday I noted Justice DeWine's concurrence in Aalim II, and promised to write a bit more. And so--as I see Justice DeWine jog down the street past my office window--here is that post.
The majority opinion in Aalim II is a rejection of a due-process challenge to Ohio's statutory scheme providing for mandatory bindover of juveniles to common pleas court if certain factors are met. Justice DeWine agrees with the conclusion that the scheme is in fact constitutional, but writes separately to emphasize his belief that the Court has conflated procedural and substantive due process standards.
Stick with me--this is more interesting than you might think.
Tuesday, May 30, 2017
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Thursday, August 25, 2016
In State v. Hand, the Court held R.C. 2901.08(A) to be unconstitutional as violative of the due process clauses of the Ohio and US Constitutions. That statute provided that an adjudication as a delinquent child constitutes a prior conviction for purposes of mandatory sentence calculation. The Court held the statute unconstitutional because juvenile determinations are made by the court without the benefit of a jury, thus running afoul of Apprendi v. New Jersey. The Court left open the possibility that juvenile delinquency adjudications could nevertheless be factors considered by the sentencing court in its discretion. Justices Terrence O'Donnell, Sharon L. Kennedy, and Judith L. French dissented.