State v. Donald
| Decision Date | 21 March 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-808,78-808 |
| Citation | 57 Ohio St.2d 73,11 O.O.3d 242,386 N.E.2d 1341 |
| Parties | , 11 O.O.3d 242 The STATE of Ohio, Appellant, v. DONALD, Appellee. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
Kidnapping, as defined by R.C. 2905.01(A)(4), is an "offense of similar import" to rape, as defined by R.C. 2907.02(A)(1), for purposes of application of R.C. 2941.25(A).
A supervisor of housekeeping at Good Samaritan Hospital in Dayton arrived at work at approximately 4:45 a. m., July 26, 1976. Shortly thereafter, Roy Darrell Donald, appellee herein, approached her and inquired as to the location of the men's restroom. He left but returned shortly and forced his way into the supervisor's stockroom office, threatened her, went through her purse, and asked for her money. He then forced the supervisor from the stockroom office into the back of the men's locker room. There, he forced her to lie on the floor, removed her clothes, and raped her. After the rape, appellee forced the victim to lead him to the hospital exit facing Philadelphia Drive.
Appellee was apprehended and indicted for rape, a violation of R.C. 2907.02(A) (1), and kidnapping, a violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4). Appellee was convicted of both charges, and the trial court imposed consecutive sentences of 7 to 25 years' imprisonment on the rape conviction and 4 to 25 years on the kidnapping conviction.
Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the kidnapping conviction, relying upon R.C. 2941.25(A), and finding that the crimes of rape and kidnapping are offenses of similar import and involved the same conduct of appellee. The cause is now before this court upon certification by the Court of Appeals that its judgment is in conflict with that of the Court of Appeals for Summit County in State v. Ware (1977), 53 Ohio App.2d 210, 372 N.E.2d 1367.
Lee C. Falke, Prosecuting Atty. and Gary W. Crim, Dayton, for appellant.
Terry E. Timblin, Dayton, for appellee.
The sole issue raised by the state on this appeal is whether the offense of rape, a violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1), and the crime of kidnapping, a violation of R.C. 2905.01(A)(4), are allied offenses of similar import within the contemplation of R.C. 2941.25(A). 1
R.C. 2905.01(A)(4) defines "kidnapping" as follows:
Accordingly, the crime of kidnapping, as herein involved, requires the following elements: (1) the use of force, threat, or deception; (2) either (a) removal of the victim from the place where he is found or (b) restraint of the victim's liberty; and (3) that the first two elements are committed for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity with the victim against his will.
R.C. 2907.02(A)(1) defines the crime of rape as follows:
A comparison of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1) and 2905.01(A)- (4) clearly indicates similarity between the two offenses. Both offenses, by their very nature, are committed for the same purpose. 2 The kidnapping precedes the actual rape, but can be committed whether the conduct of the offender ultimately results in rape. The use of force or threat of force is a necessary element of the crime of rape, and the same force or threat may constitute one of the elements of kidnapping, although the kidnapping may also be committed by deception. Necessarily, in the crime of rape, the victim must be restrained of her liberty, which can constitute an element of kidnapping. As indicated, the motivation is the same. Within the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bohannon v. Warden, Allen/Oakwood Corr. Inst.
...the Ohio Supreme Court has held that (1) kidnapping and rape are allied offenses of similar import. [FN4]See State v. Donald (1979), 57 Ohio St.2d 73, 74-75, 386 N.E.2d 1341, syllabus; accord State v. Adams, 103 Ohio St.3d 508, 2004 Ohio 5845, 817 N.E.2d 29, P89-95., (2) kidnapping and aggr......
-
State v. Adams
...Logan, to establish the separate animus required to separately convict Adams for kidnapping Ashley. See State v. Donald (1979), 57 Ohio St.2d 73, 11 O.O.3d 242, 386 N.E.2d 1341, syllabus (kidnapping is an offense of similar import to rape); Logan; Jenkins; State v. Fears (1999), 86 Ohio St.......
-
State v. Ruff
...v. Roberts, 62 Ohio St.2d 170, 405 N.E.2d 247 (1980) ; State v. Thomas, 61 Ohio St.2d 254, 400 N.E.2d 897 (1980) ; State v. Donald, 57 Ohio St.2d 73, 386 N.E.2d 1341 (1979). The cases led to formation of a two-step test that, first, compared the elements of the offenses involved and, second......
-
State v. Roberts
...St.2d 196, 271 N.E.2d 776; Weaver v. State (1906), 74 Ohio St. 53, 77 N.E. 273 (paragraph one of the syllabus). In State v. Donald (1979), 57 Ohio St.2d 73, 386 N.E.2d 1341, this court addressed the question of whether the offense of rape, a violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1), and the crime of......
-
Punish Once, Punish Twice: Ohio's Inconsistent Interpretation of it Multiple Counts Statute
...8See infra Sections II & IV. 9397 N.E.2d 1345 (Ohio 1979). 10Id. at 1348. 11Id. at 1349. 12Id. at 1348; see also State v. Donald, 386 N.E.2d 1341 (Ohio 1979). Page 811 2008] OHIO MULTIPLE COUNTS STATUTE 811 child endangering and involuntary manslaughter charges because, as applied to th......