Court Opinion

ID: 9813970
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 23:27:47.843565+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:59.841245
License: Public Domain

Pryatel, J.
I concur in the opinion, but would add one point. Cleveland Codified Ordinance 619.11 (disorderly solicitation) is a broader prohibition than Cleveland Codified Ordinance 619.09 (soliciting). Ordinance 619.11 prohibits soliciting whether or not it is for hire6 while under Ordinance 619.09 the soliciting must necessarily be for hire. Hence, one cannot violate Ordinance *213619.09 without also violating Ordinance 619.11. A defendant charged under Ordinance 619.09, then, must always be sentenced under the lesser penalty of Ordinance 619.11. State v. Wilson (1979), 58 Ohio St. 2d 52, 55-56 [12 O.O.3d 51]. Accordingly, I concur in the opinion of the court and would remand for sentencing.

 Ordinance 619.11 pertinently reads:
“(a) No person shall * * * commit or afford an opportunity to commit fornication or prostitution or do any other lewd, immoral act * * (Emphasis added.)
Prostitution as defined by R.C." 2907.25(A) is: “No person shall engage in sexual activity for hire.”