In re D.B.
Ohio Supreme Court
129 Ohio St. 3d 104 (2011)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
The prosecution (plaintiff) charged 12-year-old D.B. (defendant) with the statutory and forcible rape of M.G., an 11-year-old boy. The prosecution had also charged D.B. with the statutory rape of 12-year-old A.W. but dropped that charge before trial. A.W. testified to seeing D.B. and M.G. engage in anal sex. A.W. and M.G. said D.B. always initiated the incidents and either bribed M.G. with video games or used physical force to convince him to engage in sexual conduct. But A.W. said M.G. always agreed to sexual conduct beforehand, and the judge dismissed the forcible-rape counts. The court found no question that the sexual acts detailed in the remaining charges occurred, but could not find D.B. used force during any of those acts. As a result, the court adjudicated D.B. delinquent based solely on violating the statutory-rape law. D.B. appealed, arguing the statutory-rape law was unconstitutionally vague and arbitrary as applied to him. The appellate court upheld the statute’s constitutionality and D.B.’s adjudication. D.B. appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lanzinger, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.