Jones v. State
2011 Ohio 3075
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Jones was charged in 2005 with attempted murder, two counts of aggravated robbery, and two counts of felonious assault with firearm specifications in Case No. CV-729017.
- He was convicted at trial of attempted murder and two felonious assault counts, then acquitted on appeal and retried; acquittal occurred in August 2007.
- Jones filed a declaratory relief action seeking to be declared a wrongfully imprisoned person under R.C. 2305.02 and 2743.48.
- The State moved for summary judgment, arguing Jones was imprisoned due to a parole violation in his 1990 case and engaged in criminal conduct at arrest.
- The trial court granted summary judgment, concluding Jones did not prove he was not engaged in other criminal conduct arising from the incident.
- The court noted Jones’s parole violation and possession of a firearm as criminal conduct and held that Jones failed to present evidence disputing the parole officer’s account.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the court deny due process by granting summary judgment? | Jones contends acquittal proves no criminal conduct at issue. | Acquittal does not prove innocence or absence of other criminal conduct; summary judgment appropriate. | Yes; summary judgment affirmed. |
| Was summary judgment based on a ground not identified by the State? | State did not rely on identified ground; argument error. | Grounds shown by parole violation evidence supported summary judgment. | Yes; grounded on parole violation evidence; affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Jones v. Suster, 84 Ohio St.3d 70 (1998-Ohio-275) (two-step wrongful imprisonment procedure; preponderance standard)
- Gover v. Ohio, 67 Ohio St.3d 93 (1993-Ohio-7) (claimants must show not only guilt determinations but innocence)
- Walden v. State, 47 Ohio St.3d 47 (1989) (wrongful imprisonment statutes not for mere avoidance of liability)
- Chandler v. State, 95 Ohio App.3d 142 (1994) (acquittal does not necessarily prove innocence for 2743.48 purposes)
- Schrader v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 20 Ohio St.3d 41 (1985) (acquittal transcript may be insufficient to prove innocence under 2743.48)