Youngstown Daily Legal News

Court says woman was reckless in allowing horses to escape

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: October 15, 2012

A 3rd District Court of Appeals panel recently ruled that a Union County woman was properly convicted of permitting animals to run at large after her horses were found standing on a highway.

The three-judge appellate panel rejected Lisa Riegel’s claims that her conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence because it ruled she was aware of a faulty fence and the horses’ ability to escape their enclosure.

“We do not find that the trial court clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered,” 3rd District Judge John Willamowski wrote for the court.

According to case summary, a man was driving down U.S. Route 36 on Aug. 12, 2011, when he saw three horses standing in the highway.

He testified that he braked and swerved into a ditch to avoid hitting the horses. A Union County Sheriff’s Department deputy stated that he was dispatched and found the horses running in the roadway and Riegel’s neighbor’s yard.

A dispatcher called Riegel and she led the horses back to her property.

The following week, a man was driving down the same section of the highway and noticed several horses grazing near the road in a yard that was not enclosed. A deputy was dispatched and Riegel again came to coax the horses back to a barn on her property. She explained to the deputy that a fence in the horses’ pen was unstable and the animals could push it over when it rained.

Riegel was charged with two counts of permitting animals to run at large, a fourth-degree misdemeanor.

A Marysville Municipal Court found her guilty of both charges and sentenced her to 30 days in jail and a $250 fine for each charge. The court suspended the fine and jail sentence for one charge and suspended 15 days for the second charge.

On appeal to the 3rd District, Riegel claimed the court used the incorrect statute and that her conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The appellate panel found that the statute governing animals running at large was changed in September 2011 and Riegel’s offenses took place in August 2011. It also determined that she was not sentenced until November of that year.

The judges, however, held that the law could not apply to Riegel’s crimes unless it specified that it could be enforced retroactively.

“After a review of the record and applicable law, we find that Riegel’s arguments concerning this assignment of error are without merit for the following reasons: The original 1978 version of the statute that was in effect at the time the horses were at large and which version was utilized by the trial court was the applicable version; and, under either version of the statute, the was ample evidence to prove that Riegel was reckless in allowing them to escape, and hence, was not without ‘fault’ under R.C. 951.02 and R.C. 951.12,” Willamowski stated.

Riegel claimed her conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence because the state did not show that her actions were reckless, meaning she had knowledge that her horses were loose or that it was her fault.

“However, there was ample testimony and evidence that indicated that Riegel was aware of the fact that the horse enclosure was not adequate to contain the horses, especially when it rained, and that she was reckless in not rectifying a condition that posed a serious danger to others,” Willamowski continued.

“Having found no error prejudicial to the appellant herein in the particulars assigned and argued, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.”

Fellow 3rd District Judge Vernon Preston and Presiding Judge Stephen Shaw joined Willamowski to form the majority.

The case is cited State v. Riegel, case No. 2012-Ohio-4517.

[Back]