State v. Butler
2011 Ohio 1652
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Appellant Thomas Butler was charged in Lawrence County with three counts of sexual battery under R.C. 2907.03(A)(5) based on the minor victim staying in his home and Butler having authority over her, provided by her grandmother custodian, with Butler allegedly providing support, care, and supervision.
- The indictment asserted Butler was a person in loco parentis to the minor by virtue of the stay-at-home arrangement and the custodial assignment.
- Butler moved to dismiss all three counts as insufficient to allege in loco parentis under State v. Noggle, arguing the facts did not demonstrate a dominant parental role or reliance for support.
- The trial court denied the motion, finding the indictment sufficiently alleged the basic facts supporting an in loco parentis theory under Noggle.
- Butler pled no contest to count one; counts two and three were dismissed; he was convicted of one count of sexual battery and sentenced to five years in prison.
- On appeal, Butler contends the indictment failed to plead in loco parentis adequately; the court must determine whether the indictment’s facts are legally sufficient to support the theory.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the indictment properly allege in loco parentis status | Butler argues Noggle requires more explicit basic facts; the indictment insufficient | State contends the indictment pleads the basic facts showing in loco parentis based on residence, authority, and care | Indictment legally sufficient to allege in loco parentis |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Noggle, 67 Ohio St.3d 31 (Ohio Supreme Court 1993) (indictments must state basic facts supporting in loco parentis; home-based authority matters)
- State v. Evans, 2010-Ohio-2554 (Ohio Ct. App. Scioto 2010) (indictment sufficiency tested without evidence; factual allegations must charge offense)
- State v. Patterson, 63 Ohio App.3d 91 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989) (indictment sufficiency; words of statute or equivalent language must give notice of elements)
- State v. Ross, 12 Ohio St.2d 37 (Ohio Supreme Court 1967) (words of the statute may charge an offense or require more specificity)
- State v. Smith, 2007-Ohio-502 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007) (indictment sufficiency for statutory offenses; elements must be clear)