State v. Vertrees, 2021 Ohio 1239

Hannah R. Vertrees was charged in juvenile court with contributing to a child’s unruliness/delinquency based on alleged failures to report her child J.S.’s school absences; the original complaint listed an incorrect statute subsection (2919.24(A)(2) / clerical error).
Vertrees pleaded not guilty; the case proceeded to a bench trial on June 16, 2020. During trial she moved orally to dismiss based on the incorrect statutory citation.
The State moved to amend the complaint to the correct statutory subsection (R.C. 2919.24(B)(2)); the trial court denied dismissal, allowed the amendment, and found Vertrees guilty.
The court sentenced Vertrees to six months in jail and a fine, but suspended both conditioned on compliance with court orders. Vertrees appealed.
Key factual support for the conviction: school officials and truancy officers testified about pre-court and school conferences, written notices that J.S. had many unexcused hours, repeated school calls and a home visit, and that Vertrees failed to call or otherwise cooperate on numerous days.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Vertrees)	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying dismissal and amending the complaint after trial to correct the statutory subsection	The complaint’s wrong subsection was a clerical/formal defect; Crim.R. 7(D) permits amendment when identity of the crime is unchanged and the amendment caused no prejudice	The numeric statute citation was substantively defective (pointing to a definitional subsection), so conviction based on the unamended complaint is void	Amendment was permissible; it did not change the name/identity of the offense, Vertrees was not prejudiced, and she waived all but plain error — no plain error found. Conviction stands
Whether the evidence was sufficient and the conviction against the manifest weight because State failed to prove Vertrees acted to cause child’s truancy	Evidence showed Vertrees knew her reporting responsibilities, received conferences/notices, missed/failed to return calls, and disregarded duties — supporting reckless conduct causing habitual truancy	Insufficient proof that Vertrees acted in a way that caused J.S. to be truant; challenges both sufficiency and weight	Sufficiency: Evidence was sufficient to prove Vertrees acted recklessly in a way tending to cause habitual truancy. Manifest-weight claim was not substantively argued beyond sufficiency, so the court declined to separately analyze weight. Conviction upheld

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (distinguishes sufficiency and manifest-weight standards)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1989) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (defers to the trier of fact on credibility and weight)
State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151 (1980) (defines abuse-of-discretion standard)
State v. Rohrbaugh, 126 Ohio St.3d 421 (2010) (failure to object to indictment/complaint before trial waives all but plain error)
State v. Moody, 104 Ohio St.3d 244 (2004) (establishes recklessness as culpable mental state for contributing to unruliness)
State v. Kates, 169 Ohio App.3d 766 (2006) (amendment that changes the name or identity of the offense is reversible error)