State v. Hutton

• Decision Date: 02 June 1937
• Docket Number: 26293.
• Citation: 132 Ohio St. 461,9 N.E.2d 295
• Parties: STATE v. HUTTON.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

9 N.E.2d 295

132 Ohio St. 461

STATE v. HUTTON.

No. 26293.

Supreme Court of Ohio

June 2, 1937

Appeal from Court of Appeals, Stark County.

On November 20, 1935, the defendant Hutton was arrested upon an affidavit filed in the municipal court of the city of Massillon, Ohio, charging that he 'did unlawfully drive an automobile upon the public highways of the state of Ohio in a careless and reckless manner so as to endanger the life and limb of those lawfully upon said highway.'

The defendant filed a motion for an order quashing the affidavit on the ground that the 'affidavit is not sufficient to fairly and reasonably inform the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.' The motion was overruled, and thereupon the cause proceeded to trial. The defendant was found guilty, and a fine of $25 and costs was imposed.

The defendant filed a petition in error in the court of common pleas, and the judgment of conviction was affirmed in the following language: 'This cause came on for hearing on the petition-in-error, a transcript of the record of the Municipal Court of Massillon, Ohio and the briefs of the parties herein and, on consideration, the court finds that the plaintiff-in-error, having submitted his evidence in the case and going to trial on the merits thereof, waived any irregularities that may have appeared on the affidavit and the judgment of said Municipal Court of Massillon, Ohio is hereby affirmed with costs * * *.'

Thereafter the defendant perfected an appeal upon questions of law, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.

The case is in this court by reason of the allowance of a motion to certify.

C. F. Schnee and Scott A. Belden, both of Akron, for appellant.

Richard B. Hardman, of Massillon, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The affidavit is predicated upon the provisions of Section 12603-1, General Code, which reads in part as follows 'Whoever operates a motor vehicle on the public roads or highways without due regard for the safety and rights of pedestrians and drivers and occupants of all other vehicles and so as to endanger the life, limb or property of any persons while in the lawful use of the roads or highways shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.'

Inasmuch as the offense is charged in the affidavit in substantially the language of the foregoing statute, the state contends that this is sufficient because it complies with the following requirement of Section 13437-4, General Code 'In charging an offense, each count shall contain, and shall be sufficient if it contains in substance, a statement that the accused has committed some public offense therein specified. Such statements may be made in ordinary and concise language without any technical averments or any allegations not essential to be proved. It may be in the words of the enactment describing the offense or declaring the matter charged to be a public offense, or in any words sufficient to give the accused notice of the offense of which he is charged.'

In reply to this contention the defendant insists that neither the affidavit nor this statute is sufficient to fairly and reasonably inform him of the nature and cause of the accusation, as provided by Section 10 of Article I of the Constitution of...