Univ. Hts. v. Johanan
2022 Ohio 2578
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- On June 6, 2021, Johanan left one of her two dogs inside her parked car at Walter Stinson Park while she remained in the park for about an hour; concerned citizens rescued the panting dog around 10:15 a.m.
- The City charged Johanan with one count of cruelty to animals under University Heights Codified Ordinances 618.05(a)(3) (conveying an animal in a cruel or inhuman manner).
- Johanan, proceeding pro se, filed a "challenge of jurisdiction" and multiple other nonstandard filings (e.g., demand for "trial by jury of peers," requests for judges' bar records, and assertions of foreign-national/diplomatic status); the trial court treated the jurisdiction filing as a motion to dismiss and denied it.
- Trial proceeded; a jury found Johanan guilty. The court imposed a $150 fine and court costs.
- On appeal Johanan raised multiple constitutional and statutory claims in a single paragraph brief and failed to supply a trial transcript.
- The Eighth District affirmed, citing briefing noncompliance and Johanan’s failure to provide the appellate record (transcript), and therefore presuming regularity of the trial court proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of trial court jurisdiction / motion to dismiss | City: trial court properly denied baseless jurisdictional challenge and followed procedure | Johanan: court lacked jurisdiction (various sovereign-citizen/foreign-national theories) | Denied — filings nonsensical and failed to raise cognizable jurisdictional defect |
| Right to "trial by jury of peers" (Sixth Amendment) | City: jury trial provided; no defect in trial process | Johanan: entitled to "trial by jury of peers" as pleaded | Rejected — appellant failed to develop argument or cite record; no persuasive error shown |
| Constitutional claims (due process, deprivation of civil rights, conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242) | City: no deprivation; criminal prosecution proper | Johanan: alleged conspiracy and deprivation of rights under federal statutes | Rejected — claims unsubstantiated in brief, not argued separately, no record support provided |
| Appellate procedural compliance (transcript and briefing rules) | City: record and briefing sufficient; appellant bears burden to provide transcript | Johanan: proceeded pro se and did not provide transcript | Affirmed — failure to supply transcript and to comply with App.R.16/9( B) allows presumption of regularity and warrants overruling assignments of error |
Key Cases Cited
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197 (1980) (appellant must provide transcript necessary for appellate review; burden to show error by reference to record)