2011 Ohio 4998
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Jackson was charged with trafficking in drugs under R.C. 2925.03(A)(1) and (A)(2) in Lorain County.
- The State filed a bill of particulars noting ecstasy/MDMA was involved.
- Jackson moved to dismiss counts for failure to identify a specific controlled substance; the court denied.
- The State moved to take judicial notice that BZP is Schedule I; Jackson objected and the court granted the request.
- Jackson pleaded no contest and was convicted on all counted offenses, including the trafficking charges.
- The first assignment of error argued the indictment failed to specify the controlled substance; the second argued inconsistency with the bill of particulars
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment must specify substance involved | Headley requires identification of the controlled substance in trafficking charge. | Indictment tracked the statute and schedule; amendment would not change the offense. | Indictment defective; must be dismissed or remanded |
| Indictment sufficiency on former acquittal/conviction | If substance mismatch existed, it could bar future prosecutions. | Issue moot after ruling on issue I; no separate ruling necessary. | Moot; no ruling on the second assignment |
Key Cases Cited
- Headley, 6 Ohio St.3d 475 (Ohio 1983) (essential element is the identity of the controlled substance)
- Childs, 88 Ohio St.3d 558 (Ohio 2000) (reaffirms identifying the exact substance when charging aggravated trafficking)
- Pepka, 125 Ohio St.3d 124 (Ohio 2010) (indictment adequate if it states the offense and necessary elements)
- Horner, 126 Ohio St.3d 466 (Ohio 2010) (indictment tracking statute may be sufficient without enumerating mental state)
- Buehner, 110 Ohio St.3d 403 (Ohio 2006) (indictment tracking the language of the statute may be sufficient)
- Lynn, 129 Ohio St.3d 146 (Ohio 2011) (trial conforming jury instructions when underlying offense misnamed)