Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court held that Columbus City Code 2327.14, which prohibits harboring an animal that makes unreasonably loud or disturbing sounds, is not unconstitutionally vague on its face or as applied. The court affirmed Rebecca Kim’s conviction, concluding that the ordinance provides objective standards based on the character, intensity, and duration of the disturbance.
Holdings
- Columbus City Code 2327.14 is not unconstitutionally vague on its face because it provides objective standards—whether the noise is unreasonably loud or disturbing and its character, intensity, and duration—to place a person of ordinary intelligence on notice of the prohibited conduct.
- The ordinance is not unconstitutionally vague as applied because a person of ordinary intelligence would understand that allowing a dog to bark nonstop for more than an hour at a volume audible over a lawn mower is prohibited conduct.
Questions Presented
- Whether Columbus City Code 2327.14 is unconstitutionally vague on its face.
- Whether Columbus City Code 2327.14 is unconstitutionally vague as applied to Kim's conduct.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (5)
- State v. Ferraiolo, 140 Ohio App. 3d 585, 748 N.E.2d 584 (2000)(not controlling)
- Columbus v. Kim, 113 Ohio St. 3d 1464, 2007-Ohio-1722, 864 N.E.2d 651(prior history)
- State v. Anderson, 57 Ohio St. 3d 168, 171, 566 N.E.2d 1224 (1991)(followed)
- Coates v. Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611, 614, 91 S. Ct. 1686, 29 L. Ed. 2d 214 (1971)(followed)
- United States Civ. Serv. Comm. v. Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO, 413 U.S. 548, 578-579, 93 S. Ct. 2880, 37 L. Ed. 2d 796 (1973)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…