State v. Madison , 2019 Ohio 804 ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State v. Madison, 
    2019-Ohio-804
    .]
    COURT OF APPEALS
    COSHOCTON COUNTY, OHIO
    FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    STATE OF OHIO                                 JUDGES:
    Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J
    Plaintiff – Appellee                  Hon. William B. Hoffman, J.
    Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.
    -vs-
    Case No. 2018CA0006
    FLORENCE E. MADISON
    Defendant – Appellant                  O P I N IO N
    CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS:                     Appeal from the Coshocton County Court
    of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division,
    Case No. 201840015
    JUDGMENT:                                     Affirmed
    DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY:                       March 6, 2019
    APPEARANCES:
    For Plaintiff-Appellee                        For Defendant-Appellant
    CHRISTIE M.L. THORNSLEY                       JEFFREY A. MULLEN
    Assistant Prosecuting Attorney                Coshocton County Public Defender
    318 Chestnut Street                           239 N. Fourth Street
    Coshocton, Ohio 43812                         Coshocton, Ohio 43812
    Coshocton County, Case No. 2018CA0006                                                      2
    Hoffman, J.
    {¶1}   Appellant Florence Madison appeals the judgment entered by the
    Coshocton County Common Pleas Court, Juvenile Division, convicting her of contributing
    to the unruliness of a minor. Appellee is the state of Ohio.
    STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE
    {¶2}   Appellant’s daughter, G.M., was a fifth grade student at Coshocton
    Elementary School. From September 5, 2017, until January 4, 2018, G.M. missed 23
    unexcused days of school due to head lice. Appellant and G.M. resided with Appellant’s
    mother. In late 2017, a meeting was scheduled with Appellant, school personnel, a
    truancy officer, and a representative from Job and Family Services (JFS) concerning the
    ongoing problems with lice in Appellant’s home. At this meeting, a plan was devised to
    rectify the truancy issue. The short term plan was to get G.M. lice free, and move her to
    the home of another relative until Appellant was able to obtain housing away from her
    mother, as Appellant’s mother was unwilling to rectify the lice infestation in her home.
    {¶3}   After the meeting, G.M. continued to miss school because of head lice.
    G.M. was not passing fifth grade due to her ongoing absences from school. Referrals to
    JFS were unsuccessful, and because the school had attempted unsuccessfully to deal
    with the truancy problem due to head lice for three school years, charges were brought
    against Appellant.
    {¶4}   The case proceeded to bench trial. Following trial, the court found Appellant
    guilty of contributing to the unruliness of a minor. He sentenced her to 30 days in jail, all
    suspended, and fined her $100, which was also suspended. She was placed on probation
    for one year and ordered to follow and attend all appointments with Allwell Behavioral
    Coshocton County, Case No. 2018CA0006                                                        3
    Health, make and keep an appointment with the health department for a lice check, have
    the child in school every day, comply with her case plan from JFS, and obtain housing.
    {¶5}    It is from the July 16, 2018 judgment of conviction and sentence Appellant
    prosecutes this appeal, assigning as error:
    THE TRIAL COURT’S VERDICT WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST
    WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.
    {¶6}    Appellant argues the judgment is against the manifest weight of the
    evidence.        She specifically argues she did not contribute to her daughter’s truancy
    because she was not in control of the residence, and thus was unable to remedy the lice
    infestation in the home.1
    {¶7}    In determining whether a verdict is against the manifest weight of the
    evidence, the appellate court reviews the entire record, weighs the evidence and all
    reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses, and determines whether in
    resolving conflicts in evidence the trier of fact “clearly lost its way and created such a
    manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial
    ordered.” State v. Thompkins, 
    78 Ohio St. 3d 380
    , 387, 
    1997-Ohio-52
    , 
    678 N.E.2d 541
    ,
    quoting State v. Martin, 
    20 Ohio App. 3d 172
    , 175, 
    485 N.E.2d 717
     (1983).
    {¶8}    The court found Appellant guilty of contributing to the unruliness of a minor
    in violation of R.C. 2919.24(B)(2):
    1   Appellant concedes the child was unruly by reason of truancy.
    Coshocton County, Case No. 2018CA0006                                                    4
    (B) No person, including a parent, guardian, or other custodian of a
    child, shall do any of the following:
    (2) Act in a way tending to cause a child or a ward of the juvenile
    court to become an unruly child or a delinquent child;
    {¶9}   In the instant case, there was evidence Appellant and G.M. lived with
    Appellant’s mother, who was in control of the lice-infested home. However, the testimony
    of John Casey, assistant principal at G.M.’s school, and Nate Berry, the juvenile probation
    officer involved in the case, established the school attempted to work with Appellant on a
    plan to solve the problem. The State presented testimony Appellant agreed to a plan
    whereby once G.M. was lice-free, she would go live with another relative until such time
    as Appellant could obtain independent housing.        However, Appellant did not follow
    through with this plan.     G.M. continued to reside in the home with Appellant and
    Appellant’s mother, and as of the day of the bench trial in the instant case, was still
    missing school due to head lice. Tr. 11, 13, 25. From this testimony, we find the trial
    court’s decision Appellant contributed to the unruliness of a minor in violation of R.C.
    2919.24(B)(2), was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
    {¶10} The assignment of error is overruled.
    Coshocton County, Case No. 2018CA0006                                       5
    {¶11} The judgment of the Coshocton County Common Pleas Court, Juvenile
    Division, is affirmed.
    By: Hoffman, J.
    Gwin, P.J. and
    Baldwin, J. concur
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2018CA0006

Citation Numbers: 2019 Ohio 804

Judges: Hoffman

Filed Date: 3/6/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021