State v. McKenzie
2017 Ohio 9138
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Brandon McKenzie was arrested for two OVI counts and refused chemical testing; an administrative license suspension (ALS) was issued under R.C. 4511.191.
- At McKenzie’s initial appearance the municipal court journal entry indicates he appealed the ALS and the court continued the suspension pending a hearing; no ALS hearing was held.
- A jury later found McKenzie not guilty of the underlying OVI charges.
- On the same day McKenzie filed a motion to vacate the ALS (June 14, 2017), the trial court granted the motion and vacated the suspension; the State filed a response afterward.
- The State appealed, arguing (1) the trial court lacked jurisdiction because McKenzie did not timely appeal the ALS, (2) the court erred by vacating the ALS based on the OVI acquittal, and (3) the court erred by ruling before permitting the State to respond.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (McKenzie) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on motion because ALS was not timely appealed | McKenzie failed to timely appeal ALS; without timely appeal court lacked jurisdiction and its order is void | Trial court record shows an ALS appeal was made at initial appearance (oral motion reflected in journal entry) | Overruled — court presumed record correct that McKenzie appealed; trial court had jurisdiction |
| Whether acquittal on OVI charges requires vacatur of ALS | Acquittal should not preserve ALS; State argues ALS survives acquittal under statute | McKenzie argued his not-guilty verdict eliminated basis for suspension and court properly vacated ALS | Sustained in part — court held acquittal does not affect ALS; trial court erred as matter of law in vacating ALS based on acquittal |
| Whether trial court could decide motion without allowing State to respond | State contends it was deprived of opportunity to be heard before vacatur | McKenzie obtained immediate ruling and court found subsequent State filing moot | Moot — appellate court declined to address because vacatur was reversed on statutory grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- (No cited authorities in this opinion have official reporter citations.)
