Luttrell v. Younce, 2011 Ohio 4458

Luttrell petitioned for a civil stalking protection order under R.C. 2903.214 on August 18, 2009, and a temporary ex parte order was issued the same day.
A full hearing on Luttrell’s petition occurred, initially set for August 26, 2009, and was later completed on August 31, 2009, with Younce represented by counsel only after the hearing.
The magistrate granted Luttrell’s petition and entered a permanent civil protection order against Younce; the trial court later overruled Younce’s objections and affirmed the order through November 9, 2009.
Key witnesses included Luttrell, her boyfriend Knight, and Luttrell’s stepfather Johnson, who testified to a pattern of conduct by Younce that caused Luttrell fear and distress.
On appeal, Younce argued the order was against the manifest weight of the evidence and that due process and travel rights were violated; the court rejected these arguments and affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Weight of the evidence supporting the order	Luttrell: credible evidence showed a pattern of conduct causing fear.	Younce: evidence failed to prove knowingly caused mental distress.	Evidence supported the order; not against the manifest weight.
Right to counsel at the full hearing	Luttrell supported the magistrate’s decision; counsel not required for civil proceeding.	Younce denied due process for lack of counsel.	No right to counsel at the initial civil protection order hearing.
Notice and opportunity to be heard before initial order	Younce received notice and participated in the full hearing.	Younce argued lack of notice for the temporary order.	Any error harmless; ensured notice and opportunity at the full hearing.
Intrastate travel restriction under the order	Order restricts proximity to protected persons; intent is protection, not punitive restriction on travel.	Order unconstitutionally restrains intrastate travel.	Order not unconstitutional; protections not an improper travel restriction.

C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (Ohio 1978) (standard for reviewing weight of the evidence)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (credibility of witnesses is for the factfinder)
In re. D.L., 189 Ohio App.3d 154 (Ohio 2010) (civil protection order proceedings lack right to counsel in some contexts)
Rieger v. Rieger, 2006-Ohio-482 (Sixth District) (civil proceedings; no generalized right to counsel at initial protective order hearings)
State v. Lawson, Montgomery App.No. 16288 (1997) (credibility determinations by the factfinder deserve deference)