Johnson v. City of Cincinnati

310 F.3d 484 (2002)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Johnson v. City of Cincinnati

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
310 F.3d 484 (2002)

SC

Facts

The City of Cincinnati (defendant) sought to curb drug activity in certain neighborhoods. To do so, the city adopted an ordinance designating neighborhoods with significantly high rates of drug abuse as drug-exclusion zones. The ordinance provided that any individual arrested for a drug offense in an exclusion zone was not permitted on public streets and sidewalks in exclusion zones for up to 90 days. If the individual was convicted, the ban increased to one year. There was an exception to the ban if an individual lived or worked in an exclusion zone. Patricia Johnson (plaintiff) was arrested for a drug offense in an exclusion zone, subjecting her to the ban. Johnson regularly helped care for her grandchildren who lived in an exclusion zone. Johnson sued the city, arguing that the ordinance was unconstitutional. The district court ruled in Johnson’s favor. The city appealed, claiming, among other things, that it had tried other ways to combat drug abuse in these neighborhoods to no avail.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Martin Jr., C.J.)

Dissent (Gilman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership