Safe Haven’s Law in Ohio – Teens Should Take Advantage

empty nursery with teddy bear on floor

Publisher’s Note: Attorney Charles “Bill” Morrison in our office posted this article on our Ohio Criminal Defense Law Blog on January 9, 2018. The topic of Safe Haven’s Law certainly has both criminal law and family law relevance warranting posting here as well. It is indeed a shame that this legal option is not better publicized! Click here to read more of Bill’s excellent posts.

safe haven's lawThere has been another high-profile case involving a pregnant teen accused of killing her newborn baby. Now, it needs to be made absolutely clear that this blog is NOT claiming that the teen caused the death of the child. The defendant in this case is claiming the baby was still-born. As we are not privy to the evidence, and she has not been convicted after the state has been put to its proof at a trial, we will presume that the young lady is innocent, as required under our constitution.

However, the linked article mentioned a little-known provision under Ohio law that allows parents of a newborn to effectively give up their child and face no adverse consequences. The theory behind “Ohio’s Safe Haven’s” law is to encourage parents that don’t want or cannot provide … Read More... “Safe Haven’s Law in Ohio – Teens Should Take Advantage”

Forfeiture By Wrongdoing – Ohio Supreme Court Bungles Domestic Violence Case

statue holding scales of justice

What does Forfeiture by Wrongdoing really mean in Ohio Courts?

Attorney Charles “Bill” Morrison has once again retaken the reins of the Ohio Criminal Defense Law Blog as it’s managing editor. Below is his recent post dealing with both domestic violence and evidentiary issues in the context of a criminal case. I thought that our Ohio Family Law Blog readers might enjoy it! Click on the Ohio Criminal Defense Law Blog link and click the follow button or use the email signup to become a regular reader.

forfeiture by wrongdoing domestic violenceWhile doing some research the other day for a current case, I read the most recent Ohio Supreme Court case on the ages-old doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing and boy did it have some, shall we say, interesting “takes” by our esteemed elected justices.  I’ll start with the basics:  every criminal defendant is entitled to confront the witnesses against him at trial.  In other words, if someone provides testimony at your criminal trial, you have the absolute right to cross examine that person.  This is an inviolate right under the 6th Amendment.  Did I say inviolate?  What I should say is that like all constitutional rights, when it gets too much in the … Read More... “Forfeiture By Wrongdoing – Ohio Supreme Court Bungles Domestic Violence Case”

Same-Sex Marriage in Ohio: The Debate Begins!

Ohio Judge Recognizes Same-Sex Marriage Performed In Another State As Legal

same-sex marriageOn Monday, federal Magistrate Judge Timothy Black could have opened the door to more lawsuits regarding same-sex marriage in Ohio.  Judge Black issued a temporary restraining order against multiple public officials (including Governor Kasich and Attorney General Mike DeWine) which prohibits those persons from enforcing provisions of Ohio law which prohibit state officials and institutions from recognizing same-sex marriages lawfully performed in other states in the case of Obergefell, et al. v. Kasich, et al., W.D.Ohio No. 1:13-cv-501 (July 22, 2013).

Background:

Jim Obergefell and John Arthur have been together for over 20 years.  John Arthur is currently bedridden with ALS, a neurological disease which all parties agreed will take his life in the very near future.   With the United States Supreme Court’s recent ruling in United States v. Windsor, striking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Jim and John decided it was time to take the plunge and get married.  Knowing that same-sex marriage is not permitted under Ohio law, Jim and John needed the marriage solemnized in one of the states where same-sex marriage is lawful.  The problem, though, was that John’s ALS … Read More... “Same-Sex Marriage in Ohio: The Debate Begins!”

DOMA Ruling: The Impact of this Historic Supreme Court Decision

How Will DOMA Affect Individuals In Other States?

DOMAIn a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court overturned the federal 17-year-old DOMA act (Defense of Marriage Act), leaving many people wondering the effects this ruling will have on same-sex couples in their state.  Hopefully the following information might be helpful when trying to understand this major decision in the United States v. Windsor case. In order to dispel a misconception, it should be noted that this decision does not require states to recognize same-sex marriages.

The primary point to take away from this ruling is that it will ONLY affect individuals residing in the 13 states* and the District of Columbia that have legalized gay marriage.  So, in Ohio, the DOMA ruling will not have any real present substantive affect.  But it may end up becoming a step forward in legalizing gay marriage.

Now that DOMA has been overturned, legally married same-sex couples in those specific states will be granted the same federal benefits to which heterosexual married couples have been entitled.  These benefits include social security, estate tax, joint tax-returns, military benefits, health coverage, and child custody rights.   In total, this ruling will affect over 1,000 federal benefits afforded to … Read More... “DOMA Ruling: The Impact of this Historic Supreme Court Decision”

Visitation Law in Ohio: Custody and Non-Parental

Supreme Court Custody Case Update: Visitation by a Non-Parent

The Law Regarding Non-Parent Visitation

visitationOne of the most contentious issues that may arise in custody litigation is whether a non-parent has the right to exercise visitation with a particular child.  Generally speaking, parents are imbued with an absolute right to determine who their child shall visit with under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.  This right was most clearly articulated in the United States Supreme Court’s seminal decision of Troxel v. Granville (2000), wherein the Court stated “so long as a parent adequately cares for his or her children (i.e., is fit), there will normally be no reason for the State to inject itself into the private realm of the family to further question the ability of that parent to make the best decisions concerning the rearing of that parent’s children.”

However, notwithstanding some of Troxel’s broad and sweeping language regarding parental control over matters of visitation, there have been numerous situations in which Ohio Courts have granted non-parents visitation with children over the objection of the parents.  The most common scenario is where the parents and grandparents have a falling-out, leading one or … Read More... “Visitation Law in Ohio: Custody and Non-Parental”

Guardian Ad Litem: The Difference Between Winning And Losing

What To Do When The Guardian Ad Litem Is Not Doing A Thorough Job

Guardian ad LitemThose that have been involved in custody litigation are probably aware of the important role that a Guardian ad Litem (GAL) can play in the outcome.  In fact, when both parties otherwise appear suitable, the GAL’s report can sometimes be the tie-breaker for the Judge or Magistrate hearing the case.  The input from the Guardian ad Litem is usually taken very seriously by the Court due to the fact it is thought to come from someone that is in a neutral position, has only the best interests of the children in mind, and has almost unfettered access to relevant information, such as the home life of both parents, the children’s school teachers and counselors as well as other important persons.  In short, having a favorable Guardian ad Litem report can be the difference between winning and losing.

But, what is a party supposed to do when they do not feel the Guardian ad Litem put forth sufficient time and effort to make an informed recommendation to the Court?  Like every other profession, there are really good GALs and there are some pretty lazy ones as well.  … Read More... “Guardian Ad Litem: The Difference Between Winning And Losing”

Texting While Driving Ban Now in Effect in Ohio

New Ohio Texting Law Focuses On Minors Under The Age Of 18

textingThe new Ohio texting ban went into effect on January 1, 2013. No longer are police just issuing warning tickets as they had been doing since September 2012.  After reviewing H.B 99 it’s fairly evident that the law primarily focuses on minors under the age of 18.

Strict Enforcement for Minors:

The new law makes texting, emailing, talking on your phone through any method, using computer, laptop, tablet, playing video games, or using a non-hands free GPS while driving a primary offense.  A “primary offense” means that any of the above acts can trigger a traffic stop and ticket.  This gives great authority to police officers executing this portion of the law.  Merely witnessing a minor with an electronic device in a vehicle is almost immediate grounds for a traffic stop. If you are a minor, you had better put your phone away while diving!

The penalties that result from one of these violations are very steep for minors.  For a first offense, minors face a 60-day license suspension, and a $150 fine.  Each subsequent violation renders a $300 fine and a one-year license suspension.

The Opposite Read More... “Texting While Driving Ban Now in Effect in Ohio”

Page 1 of 2
1 2