 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Singleton2/26/2002
(REGULAR CALENDAR)
DECISION
APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.
The State of Ohio, plaintiff-appellant, appeals a decision by the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, which granted a motion for judgment of acquittal in favor of Ray Singleton, defendant-appellee.
On May 18, 2000, appellee was indicted by a grand jury for two counts of workers' compensation fraud pursuant to R.C. 2913.48. The indictment alleged that "on or about September 1, 1995 to on or about June 30, 1996, [appellee] in Franklin County, Ohio, with purpose to defraud, or knowing that he was facilitating a fraud, did receive workers' compensation benefits to which he was not entitled." Count two of the indictment alleged that appellee "with purpose to defraud, or knowing that he was facilitating a fraud, did receive workers' compensation benefits to which he was not entitled, and/or did make or present, or cause to be made or presented a false or misleading statement with the purpose to secure payment for goods or services * or to secure workers' compensation benefits *."
On March 5, 2001, appellant presented an opening statement for appellee's trial. The prosecutor stated that appellee had been illegally receiving workers' compensation benefits "because the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation located here in Franklin County, Ohio, believed that work-related injuries prevented him from working." In his opening statement, appellee's counsel stated:
I believe the testimony will show in this, also, an interesting fact and one of the elements. [Appellee] has never been in Franklin County in his life until he drove up here for the arraignment with me. Any document that he ever filed in his workers' compensation case was filed in Montgomery County, Ohio. The alleged incident occurred in Montgomery County, Ohio, where they say that he worked. All his hearings on his workers' compensation happened in Montgomery County, Ohio. This will raise an issue in regard to venue, which the court will need to consider.
Before any witnesses were called, the court took a lunch recess and researched the issue of venue. After the recess, the parties discussed whether the facts that would be presented in the case supported a finding of venue in Franklin County, Ohio. In a hearing held on April 23, 2001, appellee made an oral motion to have the case dismissed. The trial court granted the motion "based upon the lack of venue in Franklin County." On May 1, 2001, the court filed a journal entry "granting the [appellee's] motion for judgment of acquittal" and a decision giving its reasoning for the journal entry. Appellant appeals the May 1, 2001 judgment of the trial court, and presents the following two assignments of error:
I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ENTERING A "JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL" WHEN RULING SOLELY ON VENUE BEFORE JEOPARDY HAD ATTACHED.
II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT FRANKLIN COUNTY IS NOT A PROPER VENUE FOR THE PROSECUTION OF THIS WORKERS' COMPENSATION FRAUD CASE.
Appellant argues in its first assignment of error the trial court erred when it entered a judgment of acquittal. Appellant contends the trial court improperly converted appellee's motion to dismiss into a judgment of acquittal.
Crim.R. 29(A) states that a trial court "shall order the entry of a judgment of acquittal * if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction of such offense or offenses." However, no evidence had been presented against appellee at the time the court acquitted him.
When a defendant in a criminal action files a motion for acquittal pursuant to Crim.R. 29 during pretrial and which
Page 1 2 3 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|