State v. Philpotts, 2022 Ohio 4362

In August 2017 Delvonte Philpotts was indicted under Ohio R.C. 2923.13(A)(2) for possessing a handgun while under indictment for other offenses; those underlying charges were later dismissed without prejudice.
Philpotts pleaded no contest to the weapons-under-disability charge and received three years of community control.
He appealed, arguing R.C. 2923.13(A)(2) violates the Second Amendment; the Eighth District affirmed.
The Ohio Supreme Court accepted review, held the case pending State v. Weber, then after Bruen ordered supplemental briefing on Bruen’s impact.
The Court vacated the court-of-appeals judgment and remanded for reconsideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen, but did not resolve the constitutional merits; two justices dissented, arguing the case should be decided now or remanded to the trial court for further fact- and burden-related proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether R.C. 2923.13(A)(2) violates the Second Amendment	Philpotts: statute impermissibly burdens his right to bear arms	State: statute is constitutional under prior precedent and should be upheld	Court did not decide merits; vacated appellate judgment and remanded for reconsideration in light of Bruen
Effect of Bruen on Second Amendment review (test and burden)	Philpotts: Bruen requires historical-tradition test and shifts burden to government to justify the regulation	State: existing record and rulings suffice for appellate resolution	Court ordered reconsideration under Bruen; did not resolve whether lower courts must remand to trial court to develop historical record
Whether change in burden of proof requires remand to trial court	Philpotts: Bruen places burden on government, so trial court should revisit facts and permit government to produce historical evidence	State: remand to appellate court for reconsideration may be adequate	Majority remanded to court of appeals; dissenters argued remand to trial court is required to address new burden and factual record
Whether Ohio Supreme Court should decide the constitutional question now	Philpotts: seek immediate merits decision	State: leave to lower courts for reconsideration under Bruen	Court declined to decide on merits and remanded for further proceedings in light of Bruen

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S.Ct. 2111 (2022) (announces historical-tradition test and places burden on government to show firearm regulations are consistent with history)
Harrold v. Collier, 836 N.E.2d 1165 (Ohio 2005) (prior Ohio precedent placing burden on challenger to prove legislation unconstitutional)
State v. Weber, 168 N.E.3d 468 (Ohio 2020) (related Ohio decision that prompted earlier hold in this case)
Boles Trucking, Inc. v. United States, 77 F.3d 236 (8th Cir. 1996) (placing burden of proof on wrong party is reversible error)
Voigt v. Chicago & N.W. Ry. Co., 380 F.2d 1000 (8th Cir. 1967) (same)
Humphrey v. Humphrey, 434 F.3d 243 (4th Cir. 2006) (discussing exceptions when burden-placement error is harmless)
West Platte R-II School Dist. v. Wilson, 439 F.3d 782 (8th Cir. 2006) (same)
Duncan v. Bonta, 49 F.4th 1228 (9th Cir. 2022) (vacatur and remand for further proceedings in light of Bruen)
Young v. Hawaii, 45 F.4th 1087 (9th Cir. 2022) (vacating lower-court judgment and remanding after Bruen)