CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project , a federally-recognized c 3 non-profit. We rely on donations for our financial security. Donate Now. Sign In Register.
The State adduced sufficient evidence at trial in order to support appellant's conviction for promoting prostitution, in violation of R. The evidence establishes that appellant supervised or managed the activities of a prostitute in violation of R. Therefore, the trial court did not commit plain error when it found appellant guilty of promoting prostitution, rather than procuring prostitution. Judgment affirmed. Filed: June 30th, Precedential Status: Precedential.
Citations: Ohio Docket Number: Author: Mary E. Your Notes edit none. Cited By This case has not yet been cited in our system.
Please support our work with a donation. Summary of Opinion The State adduced sufficient evidence at trial in order to support appellant's conviction for promoting prostitution, in violation of R.
Satterfield, Ohio JANS, Atty. Satterfield appeals her conviction and sentence for one count of promoting prostitution, in violation of R. As part of his duties, Det. Howard investigated prostitution and human trafficking related offenses. Howard testified that he has been employed by the Dayton Police Department for approximately ten years, and during that time he has made approximately prostitution related arrests.
