Court Opinion

ID: 9878421
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-27 17:18:19.004048+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:36.503757
License: Public Domain

TYACK, P.J., dissenting.
  

   {¶ 16} I respectfully dissent.
  

   {¶ 17} I believe the trial court judge would have been acting within her discretion either way she resolved this case. Having acted within her discretion, I believe her decision should be affirmed on appeal.
  

   {¶ 18} The judge was aware that police officers benefit from a full range of information when investigating a case and when making an arrest. The fact that a person who is being investigated or arrested has a past offense of violence can be significant.
  

   {¶ 19} A judge who is setting bond in arraignment court can be affected by the fact an accused has a prior offense of violence in his or her history. This information is not always immediately available at arraignment if the records have been sealed, either for issue of law or for reasons related to bureaucratic inertia.
  

   {¶ 20} I can appreciate the reasoning of the majority of this panel, but I think the evaluation and weighing of evidence in the trial court should be respected in this case. I also note that the Franklin County Municipal Court handles an incredible number
   of cases. We, as an appellate court, with a much more limited docket should be careful in reaching our decision not to burden our municipal court judges with hearings and procedures which make a difficult docket impossible to manage.
  

   {¶ 21} Again, I respectfully dissent.