Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

138 Ohio App. 3d 309

741 N.E.2d 202

State v. Morton

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 2000

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 2000-06-23

Relies on State v. McGee · 134 Ohio App. 3d 41 - State v. Martin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-06-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2024

6 state decisions

30200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

*315 Painter, Judge,

¶1 dissenting.

¶2 The state must prove that the defendant acted recklessly. 6 While Ms. Morton was negligent in not keeping good count of the children, and in not keeping the infant in her direct care, I am not willing to believe that she acted “with heedless indifference to the consequences,” and “perversely” disregarded a known risk that her conduct would cause harm to the child. 7

¶3 Not all negligence by parents that could possibly result in harm to their children is criminal conduct, as this court has held before. 8

¶4 This case is an example of the tendency to brand parents as criminals because of lapses in judgment. Ms. Morton should be applauded for being a foster parent — though it does seem that an infant might be better placed where the caregiver has fewer parenting responsibilities — not convicted of a crime.

/138/ohioapp3d/309 · .json · Public domain