In re D.C. , 2018 Ohio 2206 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as In re D.C., 2018-Ohio-2206.]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
    HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO
    IN RE: D.C.                                :     APPEAL NO. C-170089
    TRIAL NO. 16-6194
    :
    :        O P I N I O N.
    Appeal From: Hamilton County Juvenile Court
    Judgment Appealed From Is: Appeal Dismissed
    Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: June 8, 2018
    Alex Scott Havlin, Assistant Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-
    Appellee,
    J. Rhett Baker, for Defendant-Appellant.
    OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
    DETERS, Judge.
    {¶1}   Appellant D.C. appeals from the trial court’s order committing D.C. to
    the Department of Youth Services (“DYS”).           Because the trial court did not
    independently adjudicate D.C. delinquent, we determine that no final, appealable
    order exists. Therefore, we dismiss D.C.’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
    Background
    {¶2}   The state filed a delinquency complaint in Hamilton County Juvenile
    Court against D.C., who was then 13 years old, alleging that D.C. had caused physical
    harm to a 14 year old by means of a deadly weapon. The complaint alleged D.C.’s
    actions amounted to felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11, if committed by
    an adult, and that D.C. had a firearm on his person or under his control while
    committing the offense, and that D.C. had displayed the firearm, brandished the
    firearm, indicated possession of the firearm, or used the firearm to facilitate the
    offense.   The matter proceeded to trial before a magistrate, who found D.C.
    delinquent as provided in the complaint. D.C. filed objections to the magistrate’s
    decision. After a hearing on the objections, the trial court adopted the magistrate’s
    decision. The trial court then entered an order committing D.C. to the custody of
    DYS for an indefinite term of a minimum of 12 months and a maximum not to exceed
    21 years of age. In the same entry, the trial court ordered D.C. to DYS for 36 months
    in relation to the firearm specifications, to be served consecutively and prior to the
    indefinite term. D.C. appeals.
    Final-Order Requirement
    {¶3}   The jurisdiction of Ohio courts of appeals is laid out in the Ohio
    Constitution, Article IV, Section 3(B)(2), which provides in relevant part: “Courts of
    2
    OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
    appeals shall have such jurisdiction as may be provided by law to review and affirm,
    modify, or reverse judgments or final orders of the courts of record inferior to the
    court of appeals within the district * * *.” “Jurisdiction as provided by law” comes
    from two statutes—R.C. 2501.02, the “jurisdictional statute,” and R.C. 2505.02, the
    “definitional statute.” In re D.H., 
    125 Ohio St. 3d 310
    , 2018-Ohio-17, 
    95 N.E.3d 389
    ,
    ¶ 5.
    {¶4}   R.C. 2501.02 provides
    [i]n addition to the original jurisdiction conferred by
    Section 3 of Article IV, Ohio Constitution, the court shall
    have jurisdiction upon an appeal upon questions of law
    to review, affirm, modify, set aside, or reverse judgments
    or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of
    appeals within the district, including the finding, order,
    or judgment of a juvenile court that a child is
    delinquent, neglected, abused, or dependent, for
    prejudicial error committed by such lower court.
    {¶5}   In juvenile court, the law provides for two, separate procedural phases,
    the adjudicatory hearing and the dispositional hearing. See In re Baby Girl Baxter,
    
    17 Ohio St. 3d 229
    , 233, 
    479 N.E.2d 257
    (1985), citing Juv.R. 34. In the absence of a
    delinquency adjudication, the juvenile court lacks authority to consider matters
    relating to disposition. In re G.S., 4th Dist. Pike No. 14CA852, 2015-Ohio-1285, ¶ 18.
    Moreover, only a judge, not a magistrate, can enter judgment. Harkai v. Scherba
    Industries, Inc., 
    136 Ohio App. 3d 211
    , 218, 
    736 N.E.2d 101
    (9th Dist.2000); see
    Civ.R. 54(A) (“A judgment shall not contain * * * the magistrate’s decision in a
    3
    OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
    referred matter * * *.”). Therefore, where a juvenile court fails to independently
    enter judgment with respect to an adjudication of delinquency, the dispositional
    order is not a final, appealable order. See In re G.S. at ¶ 21.
    {¶6}    In the entry in which the trial court orders D.C. committed to DYS, the
    trial court states that D.C. “was adjudicated a delinquent on 1/06/2017 by reason of
    having committed an act, which if committed by an adult would constitute a felony of
    the second degree, to wit: a violation of Section 2903.11 of the Ohio Revised Code.”
    However, the magistrate found D.C. delinquent on January 6, 2017, not the trial
    court. Moreover, the entry does not adjudicate D.C. delinquent with respect to the
    firearm specifications as alleged in the complaint. In terms of finality, it is not
    enough that the magistrate found D.C. delinquent as alleged in the complaint, the
    juvenile court must independently enter judgment regarding delinquency. See Civ.R.
    54(A); In re G.S. Because the trial court failed to independently adjudicate D.C.
    delinquent, the dispositional entry is not a final, appealable order. In re G.S. at ¶ 21.
    Conclusion
    {¶7}    In conclusion, because the trial court did not adjudicate D.C.
    delinquent, we lack a final, appealable order, and we dismiss the appeal.
    Appeal dismissed.
    CUNNINGHAM, P.J., and MYERS, J., concur.
    Please note:
    The court has recorded its own entry on the date of the release of this opinion.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: C-170089

Citation Numbers: 2018 Ohio 2206

Judges: Deters

Filed Date: 6/8/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/8/2018