State v. Wong (1994), 95 Ohio App. 3d 39 - Case Study Example

v. Wong (1994), 95 Ohio App. 3d 39 Citation The of Ohio, Appellee, v. WONG, Appellant. 97 Ohio App.3d 244, 646 N.E.2d 538 (Sept. 22, 1994.)Parties Carrie Wong, Appellant Harsha, Judge Mark Ochsenbein, Prosecuting AttorneyHarry R. Reinhart for appellant Gary Gerson for AppellantKenneth J. Fishman, for Appellant Leonard, F. Lee Bailey for Appellant Facts The Appelant had been accused and proven guilty of six counts of assault, after firing a series of shots to the police officers from Oak Hill police station, who had identified themselves as police officers before the Appellant fired shots at them, damaging the Police cruiser in the struggle.

Ten days before the incidence, she had experienced a severe miscarriage. To control the pain The Appellant was under Fiorinal medication, which contains barbiturate. Prior proceedings The defense council had assessed the possibility of insanity, which would have given a not guilty verdict, on the account of insanity, but these possibilities were quickly eradicated, after two psychologists declined to testify that she might not have been sane on the day of the felony, Issue The Appellant had sent a letter to her husband, threatening him, which illustrated the lack of sanity from the Appellant.

The drugs and alcohol influence she was under in combination with the medication she had consumed could have also altered her reasoning and the claim by her daughter that she was “unwell” during the 911 call is an indication of the possibility that she was not sane while committing the felony. Holding Dr. Jackson asserted that the appellant suffered from a paranoid delusional disorder and could have been under the disorder’s influence during the committing of the crime. The ignored these claims, returning the guilty verdict on all counts back into place.

Reasoning The Appellant was under voluntary intoxication at the time of the act, and thus was guilty and responsible for all her acts. Depositions The court ended up sentencing her to fifteen to forty years in a state penitentiary, 12 years for each count of felony done, one year on every count of vandalism and did not sentence her on the gun specification count. These sentences were to run concurrently. Comments The lack of consent of the letter, throughout the trial was unfair and unjust on Wong’s case, but the verdict passed was a bit considerate to that passed by the lower courts.

Lack of consideration of the doctors insights was also vaguely unprofessional. ReferencesThe State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Wong, Appellant. 97 Ohio App.3d 244, 646 N.E.2d 538 (Sept. 22, 1994).