Abstract
The Felton decision ends years of conflict among Ohio's Appellate Districts as to whether or not the higher burden of proof of "clear and convincing evidence" is required in domestic violence cases. This article discusses the issue of whether the court inadvertently violated the constitutional rights of those individuals accused of committing acts of domestic violence. The author suggests that by abrogating the need for corroborating evidence, the Court has, in effect, made it difficult for those individuals who are innocent from protecting themselves against false allegations. Part II discusses the Felton case, while Part III briefly walks through the different burdens of proof. Part IV holds a deeper discussion of cases with “preponderance of the evidence” as their burden of proof, while Part V goes into cases using “clear and convincing evidence” as the burden of proof.
Recommended Citation
James Wilsman,
Felton v. Felton: A Case Study ,
45 Clev. St. L. Rev.
579
(1997)
available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol45/iss4/5