Not inclined to click through.
Still interested in the Court’s rationale though.
Would you please summarize?
Here is the meat from another article:
“Supreme Court Analyzed Burglary Law
Justice Donnelly explained that to prove Bertram committed burglary under R.C. 2911.12(A)(2), the Scioto County Prosecutor’s Office had to show there was “a trespass by force, stealth, or deception; into an occupied structure; when another was present or likely present; with the purpose of committing a criminal offense in the structure.“ He wrote that the Supreme Court must determine whether “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“Force, stealth, or deception” refers to how a trespasser gained entry into the structure, the Court explained. None of the parties suggested that Bertram used force. Betram argued that the record showed he trespassed onto Huff’s property, but the prosecutor provided no evidence that he used stealth or deception.
The Court noted that the definition of “deception” in state law includes “knowingly deceiving another or causing another to be deceived by any false or misleading representation” or by withholding information or by preventing another from acquiring information. Because “stealth” is not defined in state law, the Court used the ordinary meaning of the word and how it has been used in prior cases. The Court adopted the Fourth District’s definition of “stealth” in case law as “any secret, sly, or clandestine act to avoid discovery and to gain entrance into or to remain within a residence of another without permission.”
The prosecutor argued that Bertram’s behavior was deceptive and sly, but the Court found the state’s interpretation of the words to be “contrary” to the definitions in law and the plain meaning of the words. Bertram did not try to avoid his discovery or reduce his chance of being noticed, the Court wrote.
“Nor did Bertram deceive, mislead, lie to, or trick Huff into granting him entry into the garage,” the opinion stated. “Bertram did not commit burglary under Ohio law, because he did not gain access to Huff’s garage by force, stealth, or deception.””
Eight to 12 years seems like a lot for a leaf blower. People get less than that for molestation and murder.
They’re coming after property rights next. Just watch.
How do the learned judges define burglary? Did they look at the statute?
So, instead of saying “the color was RED,” a person now has to say “I did not see the ‘Hex Code #RRGGBB - #FF0000’ STOP sign”.
Ref.: https://www.rapidtables.com/web/color/red-color.html