State v. Fontes
| Decision Date | 19 January 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-23.,99-23. |
| Citation | 721 NE 2d 1037,87 Ohio St.3d 527 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. FONTES, APPELLANT. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
R. Larry Schneider, Union County Prosecuting Attorney, and John C. Heinkel, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Scott Bratton, for appellant.
The question certified by the court of appeals is whether "[p]ursuant to R.C. 2911.11(A), must the purpose to commit a criminal offense be formed at or before the time of trespass in an occupied structure or may it evolve during the course of the trespass?"
Appellant was charged and convicted of a violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(1), which defines one of two ways that an offender can commit the offense of aggravated burglary. R.C. 2911.11 provides:
"(A) No person by force, stealth, or deception, shall trespass in an occupied structure or in a separately secured or separately occupied portion of an occupied structure, when another person other than an accomplice of the offender is present, with purpose to commit in the structure * * * any criminal offense, if any of the following apply:
"(1) The offender inflicts, or attempts or threatens to inflict physical harm on another." (Emphasis added.) Appellant argues that the purpose element of R.C. 2911.11(A) clearly requires that the intent to commit a criminal offense in the occupied structure be formed at or before the time of trespass. We disagree.
In affirming appellant's conviction, the Union County Court of Appeals relied on this court's decision in State v. Powell (1991), 59 Ohio St.3d 62, 571 N.E.2d 125. In Powell, we held at paragraph one of the syllabus that In so holding, we reasoned that "[t]he crime of aggravated burglary continues so long as the defendant remains in the structure being burglarized because the trespass of the defendant has not been completed." Id. at 63, 571 N.E.2d at 127.
In analogizing Powell to the matter herein, the court of appeals held that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gardner
...invaded the dwelling for the purpose of committing a crime or that he formed that intent during the trespass. State v. Fontes (2000), 87 Ohio St.3d 527, 721 N.E.2d 1037, syllabus (to be guilty of aggravated burglary, "a defendant may form the purpose to commit a criminal offense at any poin......
-
State v. Foust
...1000; State v. Waszily (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 510, 516, 664 N.E.2d 600, abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Fontes (2000), 87 Ohio St.3d 527, 721 N.E.2d 1037. {¶ 32} We also reject Foust's constitutional arguments. An indictment meets constitutional requirements if it, "first, c......
-
State Of Ohio v. Perry
...1000; State v. Waszily (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 510, 516, 664 N.E.2d 600, abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Fontes (2000), 87 Ohio St.3d 527, 721 N.E.2d 1037). In addition, the indictment in the case at bar clearly alleged that appellant "...did, knowingly, by force, stealth or ......
-
State v. Stevens
...structure.” State v. Pickens, 3d Dist. Crawford No. 3–07–30, 2008-Ohio-1140, 2008 WL 697110, ¶ 17, citing State v. Fontes, 87 Ohio St.3d 527, 530, 721 N.E.2d 1037 (2000) (“for purposes of defining the offense of aggravated burglary pursuant to R.C. 2911.11, a defendant may form the purpose ......