Ohio Supreme Court Settles Habitual OVI Offender Sentencing - DUI Appeals Reports - 4/15/2016

/ Sivinski Law Offices,ltd/

Ohio Supreme Court affirms the OVI Habitual Offender Specification found in the R.C. 2941.1413.

State v. Klembus, 2016 Ohio 1092 (2016).

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2016/2016-Ohio-1092.pdf

March 22, 2016

Klembus was sentenced to one year for a Fourth Degree Felony OVI and one year for the repeat-OVI specification, to be served consecutively.  He appealed, and the Eighth District agreed, holding that the repeat OVI offender specification violated equal protection because OVI penalty and the specification require identical proof yet impose different penalties.  Subsequently, the First, Second, Third, Eleventh, and Twelfth Districts rejected the Eighth District opinion.

The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the Eighth District, and in upholding the specification reasoned, "The possibility of longer prison sentences for those who continue to violate Ohio's OVI statute is rationally related to the state's legitimate interest in punishing offenders and protecting the public from the dangers of impaired driving."

If you are interested in criminal defense services, or have been charged with an OVI, consider reviewing our DUI Defense Services at http://SivinskiLegal.com

DUI Appeals Reports 3/23/16

/ Sivinski Law Offices, ltd/
DUI Appeals Reports 3/23/16

The 9th District avoids an evaluation of the constitutionality of the OVI repeat offender specification by holding the trial court erred in granting motions to dismiss, before the defendants were found guilty of or sentenced to the specification.

Read More

DUI Appeals Reports 12/9/15

/
DUI Appeals Reports 12/9/15

The 1st District overturns a high tier conviction OVI conviction because it had been improperly amended from a low tier charge, the 12th District confirms that OVI and aggravated vehicular homicide charges need not be merged, the 11th District holds that the repeat OVI offender specification does not violated the Constitution, and the 12th District holds that tampering with drugs is not a crime when it is done during an impaired driving/bar fight investigation.

Read More