Oral arguments at the Ohio Supreme Court will include three cases examining various aspects of Ohio's sex offender registration and notification statute.

Oral arguments at the Ohio Supreme Court will include three cases examining various aspects of Ohio's sex offender registration and notification statute.

Oral arguments at the Ohio Supreme Court next week will include three cases examining various aspects of Ohio’s sex offender registration and notification statute, the latest in a line of cases that answer legal questions that have arisen since the law was revised as the Adam Walsh act in 2008.

The Supreme Court’s Office of Public Information today released oral argument previews summarizing the cases that will be argued August 21 and 22. There are four cases on the docket Tuesday and five cases Wednesday. Arguments begin at 9 a.m. in the Thomas J. Moyer Ohio Judicial Center and can be viewed live online on the court’s home page and the OhioChannel.org. The arguments are also carried live on local public broadcasting stations. Check here for local listings.

First up on Tuesday is a case from the Ninth District Court of Appeals in Wayne County. The question at issue is if a trial court enters a judgment of conviction and a sentencing order in its journal without including a requirement that the defendant register as a sex offender, does that judgment entry terminate the court’s subject matter jurisdiction over the case, and bar it from later imposing a registration requirement on the defendant?

On Wednesday, the court again examines aspects of the sex offender registration and notification law. First, the court will hear a case out of Montgomery County where a pre-2008 sex offender was prosecuted for a violation of his post-release registration duties and the failure to register violation took place after the Ohio Adam Walsh Act (AWA) and its companion sentencing bill, S.B. 97, became effective on January 1, 2008. The justices will be asked if the offender should be sentenced for his registration violation under the pre-AWA (Megan’s Law) penalty scheme that was in place on the date his duty to register arose, or under the enhanced AWA/ S.B. 97 penalty scheme that was in place on the date his registration offense was committed.

Finally, the third case on the docket Wednesday involves a defendant prosecuted for a sexually related offense that was committed between July 1, 2007, and January 1, 2008. The question before the court is whether the trial court can impose the registration and community notification provisions enacted as part of the Ohio Adam Walsh Act, or must apply the registration and community notification provisions of the state’s previous sex offender statute (Megan’s Law)?

Also on the docket next week:

• Crawford County workers’ compensation case.
• Montgomery County case that examines what constitutes a written contract in a civil dispute.
• The Board of Education of the Cleveland Municipal School District and a local business disputing a property valuation.
• Two Hamilton County attorney discipline cases and one from Trumbull County.