NOLLED & NOT GUILTY - 2010 CRB 046440 STATE OF OHIO / CITY OF CLEVELAND -VS- CUEVAS, ANGEL L RLP - injustice storys tremont twdc
												
								
								
								
				
				
      Submitted by Quest-News-Serv... on Wed, 05/04/2011 - 16:43. 
  
  05/04/2011 ON THE PROSECUTOR'S MOTION,                                THIS MATTER MARKED NOLLE PROSEQUI.                                DEFENDANT IS DISCHARGED ACCORDINGLY.                                Charge #1: BUILDING CODE VIOLATION - (READ COMPLETE INJUSTICE STORYS OF THE SHADOW RACIST CORRUPT SIDE OF THE SYSTEM AND TREMONT WEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN TREMONT) 
 
   | 
 
|   | 
                        Helvetica, sans-serif">General Inquiry                       | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
|                    | 
                          
                             
                             
                            
                            Events." class="hlinktext" coords="184,32,247,50" shape="rect" /> 
                             
                             
                                                    | 
 
|   | 
 
| 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
   | 
 
|   | 
                                                    Helvetica, sans-serif">General Inquiry                       | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
|                    | 
                          
                                                     
                                                     
                                                    
                                                    Events." class="hlinktext" coords="184,32,247,50" shape="rect" /> 
                                                     
                                                     
                                                                            | 
 
|   | 
 
| 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
| 2010 CRB 046440 STATE OF OHIO /                       CITY OF CLEVELAND -VS- CUEVAS, ANGEL L RLP | 
 
|   | 
 
| 
 | 
 
| 
 | 
 
| Begin                               Date | 
 | 
Sort | 
 
| End Date | 
 | 
Ascending 
                                                                Descending | 
 
 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
|   | 
 
| Search                               Results | 
57 Docket(s) found matching                               search criteria. | 
 
 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
 
| 05/04/2011 | 
ON THE PROSECUTOR'S MOTION,                               THIS MATTER MARKED NOLLE PROSEQUI.                               DEFENDANT IS DISCHARGED ACCORDINGLY.                               Charge #1: BUILDING CODE VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT                               REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN MOTION                               TO DISMISS FILED WITH THE CLERK BY SECOND | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               05/02/2011 Time: 9:30 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               DEFENDANT FOUND NOT GUILTY ON 2 MINOR                               MISDEMEANOR COUNTS LISTED ABOVE. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
TRIAL HAD | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST 5/2/11 | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
                                                                         
| 04/29/2011 | 
DEFENDANT  HAVING BEEN FOUND                               NOT GUILTY                                THE DEFENDANT IS HEREBY DISCHARGED AS TO                                THIS COUNT. Charge #1: BUILDING CODE                                VIOLATION | 
 
 
 | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/28/2011 | 
SET FOR JURY TRIAL | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/28/2011 | 
MOTION FOR DISMISS DENIED | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/26/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               Defendant filed a motion to dismiss April                               26, 2011. The Court denies the motion for                               the following reasons. This Court can                               dismiss pending criminal actions short of                               trial only when a defendant raises a                               defense, objection, evidentiary issue, or                               request that is capable of determination                               without the trial of the general issue.                               Criminal Rule 12(C). Defendant argues in                               his motion that he is not guilty, offering                               evidence by affidavit. The question of a                               defendants guilt cannot be resolved by                               affidavit. It is the general issue that                               must be resolved by trial. Defendants                               motion to dismiss is denied. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/26/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN MOTION                               TO DISMISS FILED WITH THE CLERK BY | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 05/05/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL Date:                               04/28/2011 Time: 1:30 pm Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               This case was scheduled for jury trial on                               April 28, 2011, 11:00 AM in Courtroom 13B.                               For the reasons set forth below, the                               scheduling in this case is modified, with                               the case proceeding to bench trial before                               Judge Raymond L. Pianka on the minor                               misdemeanor charges only on April 28, 2011                               in Courtroom 13B. The time of the trial is                               changed to 1:30 p.m. The jury trial on the                               remaining charges is rescheduled below. In                               addition, an indigency hearing shall be                               held on April 28, 2011, immediately                               following the bench trial on the minor                               misdemeanors.                               Defendant is charged with violating the                               Citys Building Code. The specific charges                               are:                               1. Failure to comply with an order of the                               Department of Building and Housing,                               (C.C.O. 3103.25(e));                               2. Failure to replace deteriorated OSB                               (C.C.O. 3101.10(a));                               3. Failure to paint so that wall remains                               weather tight (C.C.O. 3101.10(c)); 4.                               Failure to keep property free of wrecked,                               dismantled, inoperative, discarded, unused                               or unlicensed motor vehicles (C.C.O.                               3101.10(e)); and                               5. Failure to keep property free of debris                               (C.C.O. 3101.10(e)).                               The first three charges, above, are                               first-degree misdemeanors, each alleged to                               have recurred for a period of eighteen                               days and totaling fifty-four separate                               counts (Footnote 1).  For each count,                               Defendant faces a possible maximum fine of                               $1,000 and up to one hundred eighty days                               of incarceration.  Together, the                               fifty-four first-degree misdemeanor counts                               allow a potential maximum penalty of                               $54,000 in fines and eighteen months of                               incarceration (footnote 2).  For the two                               minor misdemeanors, also alleged to have                               recurred for a period of eighteen days and                               totaling thirty-six counts, the total                               possible maximum sentence is a $5400 fine                               (footnote 3).                               Defendant has informed a representative of                               the Court that he claims indigent status,                               entitling him to legal representation by                               court-appointed counsel. As the potential                               penalty for the minor misdemeanor charges                               does not include jail time, Defendant is                               not entitled to court-appointed counsel on                               those charges. See City of Cleveland v.                               Cohen, No. 53135, 1987 WL 15656, at *1                               (8th Dist. Aug. 13, 1987) (A defendant is                               not entitled to court-appointed counsel                               when charged with a minor misdemeanor                               because the charge poses no possibility of                               imprisonment). In addition, Defendant is                               not entitled to a trial by jury on the                               minor misdemeanor charges. See City of                               Cleveland v. Hicks, 8th Dist. No. 89842,                               2008-Ohio 1851 (The right to a jury trial                               does not apply to minor misdemeanors).                               Accordingly, the Court will conduct a                               bench trial on the two minor misdemeanors                               (charges 4 and 5 above) on April 28, 2011,                               1:30 PM, Courtroom 13 B, before Judge                               Raymond L. Pianka. Jury trial on the three                               first degree misdemeanors (charges 1, 2                               and 3 above) is rescheduled for May 5,                               2011, 11:00 AM, Courtroom 13 B. The Court                               anticipates that no further continuances                               of this trial will be granted, as this                               matter has been the subject of at least                               four extensive pretrial conferences.                               Defendant has, himself, sought and                               obtained three continuances of the                               proceedings. Further, the issue of                               indigency is being raised at a very late                               hour, 107 days from original appearance,                               after multiple representations by                               Defendant that he intended to obtain legal                               private legal representation, and only 7                               days in advance of the originally                               scheduled jury trial date. In addition to                               the trial on the minor misdemeanors, a                               hearing to determine Defendants                               eligibility for indigency status and                               qualification for legal representation by                               court-appointed counsel with respect to                               the first degree misdemeanor charges is                               scheduled immediately following the trial                               on minor misdemeanors, April 28, 2011,                               1:30 PM, Courtroom 13B.                               In determining whether Defendant is                               indigent, the Court shall be guided by the                               Ohio Public Defender Commissions standards                               for determining indigency as set forth in                               Ohio Administrative Code 120-1-03, the                               basic criteria for which includes                               consideration of defendants financial                               status, including but not limited to:                               1. Wages and earnings from employment,                               unemployment compensation, workers                               compensation, child support pension/social                               security compensation, Ohio works                               first/temporary assistance to needy                               families (TANF) program compensation,                               disability compensation, and all other                               similar forms of compensation/governmental                               assistance comprising household income;                               2. Other financial assets, including but                               not limited to available cash reserves in                               savings and checking account, stocks,                               bonds, certificate of deposit, or other                               liquid assets; other similar ownership or                               entitlement to available financial                               resources with which the applicant might                               hire legal counsel; but excluding property                               necessary to maintain employment;                               3. Consideration of the number and age of                               the applicants dependents; and                               4. Consideration of basic living costs,                               including housing, rent and/or mortgage                               payments, child support actually paid,                               child care expenses (for employed                               applicants only), health insurance,                               medical/dental expenses, Associated costs                               of caring for infirm family member,                               employment transportation costs, cost of                               fuel, food, telephone, utilities, taxes                               owed, credit cards/other loan payments and                               other similar basic costs of living.                               To determine whether Defendant is                               indigent, and so is entitled to                               court-appointed counsel on the first                               degree misdemeanor charges, Defendant is                               ordered to furnish the Court the following                               written documentation before or at the                               indigency status hearing:                               1. Proof of cash on hand, including bank                               statements of all accounts in which                               Defendant has an interest. This includes                               banks statements of any corporate entity                               in which Defendant has an interest;                               2. Evidence and valuation of any                               investment in which Defendant has an                               interest. This includes any corporate                               entity in which Defendant has an interest;                               3. Defendants federal tax returns for                               years 2010 and 2009. This includes federal                               tax returns for any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has or had years 2010 and                               2009;                               4. Evidence of ownership, market value,                               and dollar amount of any encumbrance                               thereof (mortgage, lien etc.) with respect                               to all real property in which Defendant                               has an interest. This includes real                               property owned by any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has an interest;                               5. Evidence of ownership, market value,                               and dollar amount of any encumbrance                               thereof (lien etc.) with respect to all                               motor vehicles and/or mechanized equipment                               in which Defendant has an interest. This                               includes motor vehicles and/or mechanized                               equipment owned by any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has an interest.                               Footnotes:                               1. The Codified Ordinances of the City of                               Cleveland provide that each day during or                               on which an offense, violation, or                               noncompliance occurs or continues                               constitutes a separate offense. C.C.O.                               §367.99(a), 3103.99(a). 2. Although                               Defendant is alleged to have been out of                               compliance for a total of eighteen days,                               with each day constituting a separate                               offense and potentially subject to an                               additional one hundred eighty days of                               incarceration, the resulting number of                               days (9720) is far beyond what can be                               imposed for a misdemeanor case. Per R.C.                               2929.41(B)(1), the maximum time Defendant                               could be subject to serve is eighteen                               months                               3. $150 maximum fine per count multiplied                               by thirty-six counts equals a possible                               maximum fine of $5,400. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               INDIGENCY HEARING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 04/28/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
PRE-TRIAL HELD BY: MAG                               ROBERTS | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               04/20/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY The Court sets this                               case for final pre-trial conference on                               April 20, 2011 at 10:00AM on the 13th                               floor of the Justice Center, 1200 Ontario                               Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44113. Parties to                               check in as the reception counter for the                               Housing Court. Defendant is ordered to                               appear. Defendant has the right to be                               represented by an attorney in this                               criminal case. He has indicated in his                               filings that he has contacted an attorney.                               As of the date of this judgment entry, no                               attorney has entered an appearance for                               Defendant. If Defendant chooses to be                               represented by an attorney, he must hire                               an attorney in time for that attorney to                               prepare for trial on April 28, 2011.                               Defendant would be wise to do so as soon                               as possible and certainly before the April                               20, 2011 pre-trial. Though Defendant will                               have the right to hire an attorney                               afterward, an attorney he hired after the                               date of the final pre-trial would have                               less than five business days to prepare                               for trial. If Defendant appears for the                               April 20, 2011 pre-trial without an                               attorney, the Court will discuss with                               Defendant in detail the conduct of a                               criminal jury trial so that he can prepare                               to represent himself. The Court must                               balance its obligation to be fair to a                               defendant who does not have an attorney ¿                               offering explanations of court procedures                               so that the defendant can be prepared for                               trial with the defendants obligation to                               learn, to follow and to be bound by the                               rules of criminal procedure and evidence.                               Defendant should be prepared to discuss                               the following issues in particular. 1.                               Defendants inability to have anyone other                               than himself or an attorney present his                               case or respond to objections or to                               procedural issues.                               2. The necessity to prepare in writing                               proposed instructions to the jury and to                               review the Citys proposed instructions to                               the jury. Defendant has failed to prepare                               any proposed instructions. Defendant and                               the City should submit proposed jury                               instructions by end of business on April                               19, 2011. 3. Defendants obligation to                               identify witnesses he may want to call in                               his defense and to arrange for their                               voluntary appearance or to issue subpoenas                               for them. Defendants filings have                               indicated that he may seek to present as                               part of his the conduct of persons other                               than the complaining inspector. Defendant                               should be aware that the City may object                               to testimony about, or from, persons whose                               conduct is not relevant to the charges                               against Defendant. 4. The specific nature                               of the charges brought against Defendant.                               There are five counts, each charging                               seventeen (18) days of failure to comply                               with a violation notice, from October 15,                               2010 through November 1, 2010. They are:                               1. Failure to comply with an order of the                               Department of Building and Housing, C.C.O.                               §3103.25(e), a first degree misdemeanor;                               2. Failure to replace deteriorated osb,                               C.C.O. §3101.10(a), a first degree                               misdemeanor; 3. Failure to paint so that                               walls remain weathertight, C.C.O.                               §3101.10(c), a first degree misdemeanor;                               4. Failure to keep property free of                               wrecked, dismantled, inoperative,                               discarded, unused or unlicensed motor                               vehicles, a minor misdemeanor; 5. Failure                               to keep property free of debris, C.C.O.                               §3101.10(e), a minor misdemeanor. 5. The                               role of the judge and jury in the case.                               The jury will decide Defendant¿s guilt or                               innocence on the first degree misdemeanor                               charges. If the jury finds Defendant                               guilty, the judge, not the jury, will                               decide on the sentence. The maximum                               sentence for the three first degree                               misdemeanors charges in this case is                               $54,000 and eighteen (18) months in jail.                               The judge will decide before trial whether                               he will decide Defendant¿s guilt or                               innocence on the two minor misdemeanor                               charges or whether he will submit the                               minor misdemeanors to the jury. The                               maximum sentence for the minor misdemeanor                               charges is $5400. The final pre-trial                               conference will give Defendant the                               opportunity to ask questions about these                               and other issues. The Court cautions                               Defendant that he will not have the same                               opportunity to learn about court procedure                               once the trial in this case begins. The                               Bailiffs are ordered to deliver a copy of                               this judgment entry to defendant, Angel                               Cuevas, at: 961 Jefferson, Cleveland, OH                               44113. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/13/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 04/28/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: HRG CANCELLED - ADVANCED TO                               EARLIER DATE - HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/13/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/12/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               04/13/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/12/2011 | 
THE COUST SETS THIS CASE FOR                               FINAL PRE-TRIAL AND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE                               APRIL 13, 2011 AT 10:00 AM ON THE                               THIRTEENTH FLOOR FO THE JUSTICE CENTER ,                               1200 ONTARIO STREET, CLEVELAND, OHIO                               44113, PARTIES TO CHECK IN AT RECEPTION                               COUNTER FOR THE HOUSING COURT. DEFENDANT                               IS ORDERED TO APPEAR. IF DEFENDANT IS                               REPRESENTED AN ATTORNEY, THE ATTORNEY MUST                               APPEAR FOR THE PRE-TRIAL AND SETTLEMENT                               CONFERENCE.                               THE COURT SETS THIS CASE FOR TRIAL BY JURY                               APRIL 28, 2011, COUNSEL TO REPORT AT                               11:00AM., VOIR DIRE TO BEGIN AT 1:30PM.,                               THE TRIAL TO CONTINUE TO 9:00 A.M. ON                               APRIL 29, 2011. THE PARTIES MUST SUBMITT                               PROPOSED JURY INTSTRUCTIONS BY APRIL 12,                               2011. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN DEMAND                               FOR A JURY TRIAL FILED WITH THE CLERK | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/04/2011 | 
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE                               FILED. REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               The Court grants Defendants motion for                               discovery in part. Defendant¿s motion is                               not timely under Criminal Rule 16(M). But                               the Court finds good cause to extend the                               time for its filing so that Defendant can                               review the following evidence before trial                               so long as the request is regulated as                               provided below based on the Courts power                               to regulate discovery under Criminal Rule                               16(L). The Court orders the City to                               provide to Defendant the following listed                               evidence by April 1, 2011. Because of the                               lateness of Defendants request, the City                               may designate a reasonable time and place                               for Defendant to come and review the                               evidence with an opportunity to make                               photocopies. 1. Any photographs or                               documents or other evidence that the City                               intends to introduce at trial. 2. Any                               photographs of 961 Jefferson Avenue,                               Cleveland, Ohio that are in the possession                               of Inspector Francis Circenvcic of the                               Department of Building and Housing whether                               or not the City intends to use the                               photographs at trial.                               3. Any documents in the possession of                               Inspector Circvencic or the Department of                               Building and Housing that concern the                               enforcement of code requirements at 961                               Jefferson. 4. A witness list under                               Criminal Rule 16(I) of witnesses that the                               City intends to call in its case in chief                               or reasonably anticipates calling in                               rebuttal or surrebuttal. This order                               applies only to the City of Cleveland and                               documents that the City has in its                               possession because only the City of                               Cleveland is a party to this case. The                               order cannot be extended, as requested by                               Defendant, to parties other than the City                               of Cleveland such as Tremont West                               Development Corporation or its employees                               or Councilman Joe Cimperman or any other                               organization. Nor can the order require                               the City of Cleveland to obtain documents                               from those parties. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               Defendant filed a motion to continue                               asking the Court to continue the trial set                               for April 5, 2011 to a date in June 2011.                               As grounds for the continuance, Defendant                               argues that he wishes to complete his                               appeal to the Board of Zoning of the Citys                               denial of a requested building permit. The                               City has charged Defendant will failing                               obey a Notice of Violations ordering him                               to maintain his property, specifically to                               replace deteriorated osb boards, to paint                               and to remove junk or unlicensed vehicles                               and debris. The Notice ordered the                               corrections by October 14, 2010. The City                               alleges that the corrections were not made                               by November 1, 2010. The trial set for                               April 5, 2011 is limited to those                               allegations. The Court often has before it                               defendants who understandably wish to                               correct building code violations, or make                               improvements to their property, before the                               date of trial. Such defendants usually                               have two motivations. First, they may wish                               to assert the correction of the violations                               as a defense to the charges. Second, they                               may wish to show the Court that they have                               corrected the violations so that the Court                               will impose a lesser sentence or suspend a                               greater portion of a sentence that it                               imposes. Neither of these motivations                               supports a motion to continue the date set                               for trial. The eventual correction of code                               violations is not a defense to the charge                               that an owner failed to make the                               corrections in a timely manner. As to                               eventual compliance, or building                               improvements, offered as mitigating                               factors in sentencing, the Court in almost                               all cases, on its own initiative,                               continues cases from the date of trial or                               change of plea so that the Defendant can                               provide evidence of compliance with code                               requirements or property improvements.                               Defendants motion is to continue the date                               for trial so that he can obtain a variance                               to make a property improvement, the                               installation of a fence. That improvement                               is not relevant to the issues to be heard                               at trial. If Defendant is found guilty                               after trial or a change of plea to no                               contest, the Court would continue the case                               to allow for correction of code violations                               and other building improvements such as                               the installation of a fence. The Court                               therefore denies Defendants motion to                               continue the date for trial. Defendant                               also asks for time to complete discovery.                               The Court has already granted Defendants                               motion for discovery and directed the City                               to provide Defendant discovery by April 1,                               2011 so that he can prepare for trial. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE                               FILED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/21/2011 | 
MOTION FOR DISCOVERY FILED                               BY DEFENDANT | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL Date:                               04/05/2011 Time: 9:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS IN COURT:                               The following event: HOUSING SIP HEARING                               scheduled for 03/04/2011 at 11:00 am has                               been resulted as follows: Result:                               CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST - HOUSING                               Events Added: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL                               has been scheduled with PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               on 04/05/2011 from 9:00 am to 1:55 pm                               Event Notes: | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING SIP HEARING Date:                               03/04/2011 Time: 11:00 am Judge:                               ADMINISTRATIVE - HOUSING Location: 13TH                               FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               PRE-TRIAL HELD BY ROBERTS | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL                               Date: 01/28/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge:                               PIANKA, RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR                               COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS IN COURT:                               The following event: HOUSING COURT                               SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL scheduled for                               01/21/2011 at 9:30 am has been resulted as                               follows: Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S                               REQUEST - HOUSING Events Added: HOUSING                               COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL has been                               scheduled with PIANKA, RAYMOND L on                               01/28/2011 from 10:00 am to 10:25 am Event                               Notes: | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST 1-28-2011 | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/06/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE: SITE                               VISIT-INSP, DEFT, COMM. ORP MEMBERS                               1-19-11, 10:00AM | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
CASE ASSIGNED TO THE                               PERSONAL DOCKET OF: Participant(s): Judge                               RAYMOND L PIANKA | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL                               Date: 01/21/2011 Time: 9:30 am Judge:                               PIANKA, RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR                               COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT, HAVING BEEN                               INFORMED OF HIS/HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT                               TO A SPEEDY TRIAL WITHIN THE STATUTORY                               PERIOD OF (1) 90 DAYS FOR A MISDEMEANOR OF                               THE FIRST OR SECOND DEGREE, (2) 45 DAYS                               FOR A MISDEMEANOR OF THE THIRD OR FOURTH                               DEGREE, AND (3) 30 DAYS FOR A MINOR                               MISDEMEANOR, AS PRESCRIBED BY THE OHIO                               REVISED CODE SECTION 2945.71, THE                               DEFENDANT HAS ALSO BEEN ADVISED THAT FOR                               EACH DAY HE/SHE WAS/IS HELD IN JAIL IN                               LIEU OF BOND ON THE PENDING CHARGE COUNTS                               FOR THREE DAYS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SPEEDY                               TRIAL.                               HAVING BEEN SO ADVISED BY THE COURT THE                               DEFENDANT KNOWINGLY WAIVES SUCH STATUTORY                               AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO A SPEEDY                               TRIAL AND CONSENT TO A CONTINUANCE OF THE                               CASE BEYOND THE STATUTORY PERIOD. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
CASE CONTINUED TO 1-21-2011                               CSPT | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT HAVING BEEN                               ADVISED OF HIS/HER RIGHTS, ENTERS A PLEA                               OF NOT GUILTY. Charge #1: BUILDING CODE                               VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/15/2010 | 
SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Method :                               (CR) CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 12/02/2010                               Service : HOUSING SUMMONS ORDERED ISSUED                               Served : 12/08/2010 Return : 12/15/2010 On                               : CUEVAS, ANGEL L Signed By : Reason :                               SUCCESSFUL - HOUSING Comment : Tracking #:                               71603901984876060508 | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/02/2010 | 
CERTIFIED MAIL ISSUED                               Issue Date: 12/02/2010                               Service: HOUSING SUMMONS ORDERED ISSUED                               Method: (CR) CERTIFIED MAIL                               Cost Per: $ CUEVAS, ANGEL L 961 JEFFERSON                               AVE. CLEVELAND, OH 44113 Tracking No:                               71603901984876060508 | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/02/2010 | 
BY ORDER OF THE COURT, THE                               CLERK HAS ISSUED A HOUSING SUMMONS FOR THE                               DEFENDANT | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
BASIC COURT COSTS Charge #1:                               BUILDING CODE VIOLATION | 
85.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
COMPLAINT HAS BEEN RECEIVED                               AND IS HEREBY FILED Charge #1: BUILDING                               CODE VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: (AJ) WEST - TUES Date: 01/04/2011                               Time: 9:00 am Judge: ADMINISTRATIVE -                               HOUSING Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: (AJ) PNG - TRANS TO OTHER JUDGE OR                               COURT - HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/01/1900 | 
BACK FILED IMAGES | 
  | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
|   | 
  | 
  | 
  | 
  | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
| 
 | 
 
| 
 | 
 
| Begin                               Date | 
 | 
Sort | 
 
| End Date | 
 | 
Ascending 
                                        Descending | 
 
 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
|   | 
 
| Search                               Results | 
57 Docket(s) found matching                               search criteria. | 
 
 
 | 
 
|   | 
 
 
| 05/04/2011 | 
ON THE PROSECUTOR'S MOTION,                               THIS MATTER MARKED NOLLE PROSEQUI.                               DEFENDANT IS DISCHARGED ACCORDINGLY.                               Charge #1: BUILDING CODE VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT                               REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN MOTION                               TO DISMISS FILED WITH THE CLERK BY SECOND | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 05/02/2011 | 
MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               05/02/2011 Time: 9:30 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               DEFENDANT FOUND NOT GUILTY ON 2 MINOR                               MISDEMEANOR COUNTS LISTED ABOVE. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
TRIAL HAD | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST 5/2/11 | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/29/2011 | 
DEFENDANT HAVING BEEN FOUND                               NOT GUILTY                               THE DEFENDANT IS HEREBY DISCHARGED AS TO                               THIS COUNT. Charge #1: BUILDING CODE                               VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/28/2011 | 
SET FOR JURY TRIAL | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/28/2011 | 
MOTION FOR DISMISS DENIED | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/26/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               Defendant filed a motion to dismiss April                               26, 2011. The Court denies the motion for                               the following reasons. This Court can                               dismiss pending criminal actions short of                               trial only when a defendant raises a                               defense, objection, evidentiary issue, or                               request that is capable of determination                               without the trial of the general issue.                               Criminal Rule 12(C). Defendant argues in                               his motion that he is not guilty, offering                               evidence by affidavit. The question of a                               defendants guilt cannot be resolved by                               affidavit. It is the general issue that                               must be resolved by trial. Defendants                               motion to dismiss is denied. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/26/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN MOTION                               TO DISMISS FILED WITH THE CLERK BY | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 05/05/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL Date:                               04/28/2011 Time: 1:30 pm Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               This case was scheduled for jury trial on                               April 28, 2011, 11:00 AM in Courtroom 13B.                               For the reasons set forth below, the                               scheduling in this case is modified, with                               the case proceeding to bench trial before                               Judge Raymond L. Pianka on the minor                               misdemeanor charges only on April 28, 2011                               in Courtroom 13B. The time of the trial is                               changed to 1:30 p.m. The jury trial on the                               remaining charges is rescheduled below. In                               addition, an indigency hearing shall be                               held on April 28, 2011, immediately                               following the bench trial on the minor                               misdemeanors.                               Defendant is charged with violating the                               Citys Building Code. The specific charges                               are:                               1. Failure to comply with an order of the                               Department of Building and Housing,                               (C.C.O. 3103.25(e));                               2. Failure to replace deteriorated OSB                               (C.C.O. 3101.10(a));                               3. Failure to paint so that wall remains                               weather tight (C.C.O. 3101.10(c)); 4.                               Failure to keep property free of wrecked,                               dismantled, inoperative, discarded, unused                               or unlicensed motor vehicles (C.C.O.                               3101.10(e)); and                               5. Failure to keep property free of debris                               (C.C.O. 3101.10(e)).                               The first three charges, above, are                               first-degree misdemeanors, each alleged to                               have recurred for a period of eighteen                               days and totaling fifty-four separate                               counts (Footnote 1).  For each count,                               Defendant faces a possible maximum fine of                               $1,000 and up to one hundred eighty days                               of incarceration.  Together, the                               fifty-four first-degree misdemeanor counts                               allow a potential maximum penalty of                               $54,000 in fines and eighteen months of                               incarceration (footnote 2).  For the two                               minor misdemeanors, also alleged to have                               recurred for a period of eighteen days and                               totaling thirty-six counts, the total                               possible maximum sentence is a $5400 fine                               (footnote 3).                               Defendant has informed a representative of                               the Court that he claims indigent status,                               entitling him to legal representation by                               court-appointed counsel. As the potential                               penalty for the minor misdemeanor charges                               does not include jail time, Defendant is                               not entitled to court-appointed counsel on                               those charges. See City of Cleveland v.                               Cohen, No. 53135, 1987 WL 15656, at *1                               (8th Dist. Aug. 13, 1987) (A defendant is                               not entitled to court-appointed counsel                               when charged with a minor misdemeanor                               because the charge poses no possibility of                               imprisonment). In addition, Defendant is                               not entitled to a trial by jury on the                               minor misdemeanor charges. See City of                               Cleveland v. Hicks, 8th Dist. No. 89842,                               2008-Ohio 1851 (The right to a jury trial                               does not apply to minor misdemeanors).                               Accordingly, the Court will conduct a                               bench trial on the two minor misdemeanors                               (charges 4 and 5 above) on April 28, 2011,                               1:30 PM, Courtroom 13 B, before Judge                               Raymond L. Pianka. Jury trial on the three                               first degree misdemeanors (charges 1, 2                               and 3 above) is rescheduled for May 5,                               2011, 11:00 AM, Courtroom 13 B. The Court                               anticipates that no further continuances                               of this trial will be granted, as this                               matter has been the subject of at least                               four extensive pretrial conferences.                               Defendant has, himself, sought and                               obtained three continuances of the                               proceedings. Further, the issue of                               indigency is being raised at a very late                               hour, 107 days from original appearance,                               after multiple representations by                               Defendant that he intended to obtain legal                               private legal representation, and only 7                               days in advance of the originally                               scheduled jury trial date. In addition to                               the trial on the minor misdemeanors, a                               hearing to determine Defendants                               eligibility for indigency status and                               qualification for legal representation by                               court-appointed counsel with respect to                               the first degree misdemeanor charges is                               scheduled immediately following the trial                               on minor misdemeanors, April 28, 2011,                               1:30 PM, Courtroom 13B.                               In determining whether Defendant is                               indigent, the Court shall be guided by the                               Ohio Public Defender Commissions standards                               for determining indigency as set forth in                               Ohio Administrative Code 120-1-03, the                               basic criteria for which includes                               consideration of defendants financial                               status, including but not limited to:                               1. Wages and earnings from employment,                               unemployment compensation, workers                               compensation, child support pension/social                               security compensation, Ohio works                               first/temporary assistance to needy                               families (TANF) program compensation,                               disability compensation, and all other                               similar forms of compensation/governmental                               assistance comprising household income;                               2. Other financial assets, including but                               not limited to available cash reserves in                               savings and checking account, stocks,                               bonds, certificate of deposit, or other                               liquid assets; other similar ownership or                               entitlement to available financial                               resources with which the applicant might                               hire legal counsel; but excluding property                               necessary to maintain employment;                               3. Consideration of the number and age of                               the applicants dependents; and                               4. Consideration of basic living costs,                               including housing, rent and/or mortgage                               payments, child support actually paid,                               child care expenses (for employed                               applicants only), health insurance,                               medical/dental expenses, Associated costs                               of caring for infirm family member,                               employment transportation costs, cost of                               fuel, food, telephone, utilities, taxes                               owed, credit cards/other loan payments and                               other similar basic costs of living.                               To determine whether Defendant is                               indigent, and so is entitled to                               court-appointed counsel on the first                               degree misdemeanor charges, Defendant is                               ordered to furnish the Court the following                               written documentation before or at the                               indigency status hearing:                               1. Proof of cash on hand, including bank                               statements of all accounts in which                               Defendant has an interest. This includes                               banks statements of any corporate entity                               in which Defendant has an interest;                               2. Evidence and valuation of any                               investment in which Defendant has an                               interest. This includes any corporate                               entity in which Defendant has an interest;                               3. Defendants federal tax returns for                               years 2010 and 2009. This includes federal                               tax returns for any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has or had years 2010 and                               2009;                               4. Evidence of ownership, market value,                               and dollar amount of any encumbrance                               thereof (mortgage, lien etc.) with respect                               to all real property in which Defendant                               has an interest. This includes real                               property owned by any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has an interest;                               5. Evidence of ownership, market value,                               and dollar amount of any encumbrance                               thereof (lien etc.) with respect to all                               motor vehicles and/or mechanized equipment                               in which Defendant has an interest. This                               includes motor vehicles and/or mechanized                               equipment owned by any corporate entity in                               which Defendant has an interest.                               Footnotes:                               1. The Codified Ordinances of the City of                               Cleveland provide that each day during or                               on which an offense, violation, or                               noncompliance occurs or continues                               constitutes a separate offense. C.C.O.                               §367.99(a), 3103.99(a). 2. Although                               Defendant is alleged to have been out of                               compliance for a total of eighteen days,                               with each day constituting a separate                               offense and potentially subject to an                               additional one hundred eighty days of                               incarceration, the resulting number of                               days (9720) is far beyond what can be                               imposed for a misdemeanor case. Per R.C.                               2929.41(B)(1), the maximum time Defendant                               could be subject to serve is eighteen                               months                               3. $150 maximum fine per count multiplied                               by thirty-six counts equals a possible                               maximum fine of $5,400. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               INDIGENCY HEARING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 04/28/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
PRE-TRIAL HELD BY: MAG                               ROBERTS | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/22/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               04/20/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT COURT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY The Court sets this                               case for final pre-trial conference on                               April 20, 2011 at 10:00AM on the 13th                               floor of the Justice Center, 1200 Ontario                               Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44113. Parties to                               check in as the reception counter for the                               Housing Court. Defendant is ordered to                               appear. Defendant has the right to be                               represented by an attorney in this                               criminal case. He has indicated in his                               filings that he has contacted an attorney.                               As of the date of this judgment entry, no                               attorney has entered an appearance for                               Defendant. If Defendant chooses to be                               represented by an attorney, he must hire                               an attorney in time for that attorney to                               prepare for trial on April 28, 2011.                               Defendant would be wise to do so as soon                               as possible and certainly before the April                               20, 2011 pre-trial. Though Defendant will                               have the right to hire an attorney                               afterward, an attorney he hired after the                               date of the final pre-trial would have                               less than five business days to prepare                               for trial. If Defendant appears for the                               April 20, 2011 pre-trial without an                               attorney, the Court will discuss with                               Defendant in detail the conduct of a                               criminal jury trial so that he can prepare                               to represent himself. The Court must                               balance its obligation to be fair to a                               defendant who does not have an attorney ¿                               offering explanations of court procedures                               so that the defendant can be prepared for                               trial with the defendants obligation to                               learn, to follow and to be bound by the                               rules of criminal procedure and evidence.                               Defendant should be prepared to discuss                               the following issues in particular. 1.                               Defendants inability to have anyone other                               than himself or an attorney present his                               case or respond to objections or to                               procedural issues.                               2. The necessity to prepare in writing                               proposed instructions to the jury and to                               review the Citys proposed instructions to                               the jury. Defendant has failed to prepare                               any proposed instructions. Defendant and                               the City should submit proposed jury                               instructions by end of business on April                               19, 2011. 3. Defendants obligation to                               identify witnesses he may want to call in                               his defense and to arrange for their                               voluntary appearance or to issue subpoenas                               for them. Defendants filings have                               indicated that he may seek to present as                               part of his the conduct of persons other                               than the complaining inspector. Defendant                               should be aware that the City may object                               to testimony about, or from, persons whose                               conduct is not relevant to the charges                               against Defendant. 4. The specific nature                               of the charges brought against Defendant.                               There are five counts, each charging                               seventeen (18) days of failure to comply                               with a violation notice, from October 15,                               2010 through November 1, 2010. They are:                               1. Failure to comply with an order of the                               Department of Building and Housing, C.C.O.                               §3103.25(e), a first degree misdemeanor;                               2. Failure to replace deteriorated osb,                               C.C.O. §3101.10(a), a first degree                               misdemeanor; 3. Failure to paint so that                               walls remain weathertight, C.C.O.                               §3101.10(c), a first degree misdemeanor;                               4. Failure to keep property free of                               wrecked, dismantled, inoperative,                               discarded, unused or unlicensed motor                               vehicles, a minor misdemeanor; 5. Failure                               to keep property free of debris, C.C.O.                               §3101.10(e), a minor misdemeanor. 5. The                               role of the judge and jury in the case.                               The jury will decide Defendant¿s guilt or                               innocence on the first degree misdemeanor                               charges. If the jury finds Defendant                               guilty, the judge, not the jury, will                               decide on the sentence. The maximum                               sentence for the three first degree                               misdemeanors charges in this case is                               $54,000 and eighteen (18) months in jail.                               The judge will decide before trial whether                               he will decide Defendant¿s guilt or                               innocence on the two minor misdemeanor                               charges or whether he will submit the                               minor misdemeanors to the jury. The                               maximum sentence for the minor misdemeanor                               charges is $5400. The final pre-trial                               conference will give Defendant the                               opportunity to ask questions about these                               and other issues. The Court cautions                               Defendant that he will not have the same                               opportunity to learn about court procedure                               once the trial in this case begins. The                               Bailiffs are ordered to deliver a copy of                               this judgment entry to defendant, Angel                               Cuevas, at: 961 Jefferson, Cleveland, OH                               44113. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/18/2011 | 
ON COURT'S OWN MOTION THIS                               MATTER IS CONTINUED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/13/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING JURY TRIAL Date: 04/28/2011                               Time: 11:00 am Judge: PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: HRG CANCELLED - ADVANCED TO                               EARLIER DATE - HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/13/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/12/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL Date:                               04/13/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/12/2011 | 
THE COUST SETS THIS CASE FOR                               FINAL PRE-TRIAL AND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE                               APRIL 13, 2011 AT 10:00 AM ON THE                               THIRTEENTH FLOOR FO THE JUSTICE CENTER ,                               1200 ONTARIO STREET, CLEVELAND, OHIO                               44113, PARTIES TO CHECK IN AT RECEPTION                               COUNTER FOR THE HOUSING COURT. DEFENDANT                               IS ORDERED TO APPEAR. IF DEFENDANT IS                               REPRESENTED AN ATTORNEY, THE ATTORNEY MUST                               APPEAR FOR THE PRE-TRIAL AND SETTLEMENT                               CONFERENCE.                               THE COURT SETS THIS CASE FOR TRIAL BY JURY                               APRIL 28, 2011, COUNSEL TO REPORT AT                               11:00AM., VOIR DIRE TO BEGIN AT 1:30PM.,                               THE TRIAL TO CONTINUE TO 9:00 A.M. ON                               APRIL 29, 2011. THE PARTIES MUST SUBMITT                               PROPOSED JURY INTSTRUCTIONS BY APRIL 12,                               2011. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT'S WRITTEN DEMAND                               FOR A JURY TRIAL FILED WITH THE CLERK | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 04/04/2011 | 
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE                               FILED. REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               The Court grants Defendants motion for                               discovery in part. Defendant¿s motion is                               not timely under Criminal Rule 16(M). But                               the Court finds good cause to extend the                               time for its filing so that Defendant can                               review the following evidence before trial                               so long as the request is regulated as                               provided below based on the Courts power                               to regulate discovery under Criminal Rule                               16(L). The Court orders the City to                               provide to Defendant the following listed                               evidence by April 1, 2011. Because of the                               lateness of Defendants request, the City                               may designate a reasonable time and place                               for Defendant to come and review the                               evidence with an opportunity to make                               photocopies. 1. Any photographs or                               documents or other evidence that the City                               intends to introduce at trial. 2. Any                               photographs of 961 Jefferson Avenue,                               Cleveland, Ohio that are in the possession                               of Inspector Francis Circenvcic of the                               Department of Building and Housing whether                               or not the City intends to use the                               photographs at trial.                               3. Any documents in the possession of                               Inspector Circvencic or the Department of                               Building and Housing that concern the                               enforcement of code requirements at 961                               Jefferson. 4. A witness list under                               Criminal Rule 16(I) of witnesses that the                               City intends to call in its case in chief                               or reasonably anticipates calling in                               rebuttal or surrebuttal. This order                               applies only to the City of Cleveland and                               documents that the City has in its                               possession because only the City of                               Cleveland is a party to this case. The                               order cannot be extended, as requested by                               Defendant, to parties other than the City                               of Cleveland such as Tremont West                               Development Corporation or its employees                               or Councilman Joe Cimperman or any other                               organization. Nor can the order require                               the City of Cleveland to obtain documents                               from those parties. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
CLERK ORDERED TO JOURNALIZE                               EXTENDED JOURNAL ENTRY                               Defendant filed a motion to continue                               asking the Court to continue the trial set                               for April 5, 2011 to a date in June 2011.                               As grounds for the continuance, Defendant                               argues that he wishes to complete his                               appeal to the Board of Zoning of the Citys                               denial of a requested building permit. The                               City has charged Defendant will failing                               obey a Notice of Violations ordering him                               to maintain his property, specifically to                               replace deteriorated osb boards, to paint                               and to remove junk or unlicensed vehicles                               and debris. The Notice ordered the                               corrections by October 14, 2010. The City                               alleges that the corrections were not made                               by November 1, 2010. The trial set for                               April 5, 2011 is limited to those                               allegations. The Court often has before it                               defendants who understandably wish to                               correct building code violations, or make                               improvements to their property, before the                               date of trial. Such defendants usually                               have two motivations. First, they may wish                               to assert the correction of the violations                               as a defense to the charges. Second, they                               may wish to show the Court that they have                               corrected the violations so that the Court                               will impose a lesser sentence or suspend a                               greater portion of a sentence that it                               imposes. Neither of these motivations                               supports a motion to continue the date set                               for trial. The eventual correction of code                               violations is not a defense to the charge                               that an owner failed to make the                               corrections in a timely manner. As to                               eventual compliance, or building                               improvements, offered as mitigating                               factors in sentencing, the Court in almost                               all cases, on its own initiative,                               continues cases from the date of trial or                               change of plea so that the Defendant can                               provide evidence of compliance with code                               requirements or property improvements.                               Defendants motion is to continue the date                               for trial so that he can obtain a variance                               to make a property improvement, the                               installation of a fence. That improvement                               is not relevant to the issues to be heard                               at trial. If Defendant is found guilty                               after trial or a change of plea to no                               contest, the Court would continue the case                               to allow for correction of code violations                               and other building improvements such as                               the installation of a fence. The Court                               therefore denies Defendants motion to                               continue the date for trial. Defendant                               also asks for time to complete discovery.                               The Court has already granted Defendants                               motion for discovery and directed the City                               to provide Defendant discovery by April 1,                               2011 so that he can prepare for trial. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/31/2011 | 
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE                               FILED. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/21/2011 | 
MOTION FOR DISCOVERY FILED                               BY DEFENDANT | 
5.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL Date:                               04/05/2011 Time: 9:00 am Judge: PIANKA,                               RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS IN COURT:                               The following event: HOUSING SIP HEARING                               scheduled for 03/04/2011 at 11:00 am has                               been resulted as follows: Result:                               CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST - HOUSING                               Events Added: HOUSING CRIMINAL BENCH TRIAL                               has been scheduled with PIANKA, RAYMOND L                               on 04/05/2011 from 9:00 am to 1:55 pm                               Event Notes: | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 03/15/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING SIP HEARING Date:                               03/04/2011 Time: 11:00 am Judge:                               ADMINISTRATIVE - HOUSING Location: 13TH                               FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE:                               PRE-TRIAL HELD BY ROBERTS | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 02/07/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL                               Date: 01/28/2011 Time: 10:00 am Judge:                               PIANKA, RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR                               COURTROOM B | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS IN COURT:                               The following event: HOUSING COURT                               SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL scheduled for                               01/21/2011 at 9:30 am has been resulted as                               follows: Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S                               REQUEST - HOUSING Events Added: HOUSING                               COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL has been                               scheduled with PIANKA, RAYMOND L on                               01/28/2011 from 10:00 am to 10:25 am Event                               Notes: | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/25/2011 | 
CONTINUED AT DEFENDANTS                               REQUEST 1-28-2011 | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/06/2011 | 
JOURNAL ENTRY NOTE: SITE                               VISIT-INSP, DEFT, COMM. ORP MEMBERS                               1-19-11, 10:00AM | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
CASE ASSIGNED TO THE                               PERSONAL DOCKET OF: Participant(s): Judge                               RAYMOND L PIANKA | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: HOUSING COURT SUPERVISED PRE-TRIAL                               Date: 01/21/2011 Time: 9:30 am Judge:                               PIANKA, RAYMOND L Location: 13TH FLOOR                               COURTROOM B                               Result: CONTINUED AT DEFENDANT'S REQUEST -                               HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT, HAVING BEEN                               INFORMED OF HIS/HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT                               TO A SPEEDY TRIAL WITHIN THE STATUTORY                               PERIOD OF (1) 90 DAYS FOR A MISDEMEANOR OF                               THE FIRST OR SECOND DEGREE, (2) 45 DAYS                               FOR A MISDEMEANOR OF THE THIRD OR FOURTH                               DEGREE, AND (3) 30 DAYS FOR A MINOR                               MISDEMEANOR, AS PRESCRIBED BY THE OHIO                               REVISED CODE SECTION 2945.71, THE                               DEFENDANT HAS ALSO BEEN ADVISED THAT FOR                               EACH DAY HE/SHE WAS/IS HELD IN JAIL IN                               LIEU OF BOND ON THE PENDING CHARGE COUNTS                               FOR THREE DAYS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SPEEDY                               TRIAL.                               HAVING BEEN SO ADVISED BY THE COURT THE                               DEFENDANT KNOWINGLY WAIVES SUCH STATUTORY                               AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO A SPEEDY                               TRIAL AND CONSENT TO A CONTINUANCE OF THE                               CASE BEYOND THE STATUTORY PERIOD. | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
CASE CONTINUED TO 1-21-2011                               CSPT | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/04/2011 | 
DEFENDANT HAVING BEEN                               ADVISED OF HIS/HER RIGHTS, ENTERS A PLEA                               OF NOT GUILTY. Charge #1: BUILDING CODE                               VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/15/2010 | 
SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Method :                               (CR) CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 12/02/2010                               Service : HOUSING SUMMONS ORDERED ISSUED                               Served : 12/08/2010 Return : 12/15/2010 On                               : CUEVAS, ANGEL L Signed By : Reason :                               SUCCESSFUL - HOUSING Comment : Tracking #:                               71603901984876060508 | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/02/2010 | 
CERTIFIED MAIL ISSUED                               Issue Date: 12/02/2010                               Service: HOUSING SUMMONS ORDERED ISSUED                               Method: (CR) CERTIFIED MAIL                               Cost Per: $ CUEVAS, ANGEL L 961 JEFFERSON                               AVE. CLEVELAND, OH 44113 Tracking No:                               71603901984876060508 | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/02/2010 | 
BY ORDER OF THE COURT, THE                               CLERK HAS ISSUED A HOUSING SUMMONS FOR THE                               DEFENDANT | 
10.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
BASIC COURT COSTS Charge #1:                               BUILDING CODE VIOLATION | 
85.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
COMPLAINT HAS BEEN RECEIVED                               AND IS HEREBY FILED Charge #1: BUILDING                               CODE VIOLATION | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 12/01/2010 | 
HEARING SCHEDULED:                               Event: (AJ) WEST - TUES Date: 01/04/2011                               Time: 9:00 am Judge: ADMINISTRATIVE -                               HOUSING Location: 13TH FLOOR COURTROOM B                               Result: (AJ) PNG - TRANS TO OTHER JUDGE OR                               COURT - HOUSING | 
0.00 | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
| 01/01/1900 | 
BACK FILED IMAGES | 
  | 
0.00 | 
  | 
  | 
 
|   | 
  | 
  | 
  | 
  | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
Share 
ANTI-SPECIESISM: 
SPECIESISM: 
1. A PREJUDICE OF ATTITUDE OF BIAS TOWARD THE INTERESTS OF MEMEBERS OF ONE'S OWN SPECIES 
AND AGAINIST THOSE OF MEMBERS OF OTHER SPECIES. 
2. A WORD USED TO DESCRIBE THE WIDESPREAD DISCRIMINATION THAT IS PRACTICED 
BY HOMO SAPIENS AGANIST THE OTHER SPECIES. 
SAVE OTHER-OUR SPECIES 
SOS-FRE 
FROM RESEARCH EXPERIMENT 
QUEST, MINISTRIES, GUY TEMPELTON BLACK, PASTOR, and YOGI YOGA BEAR, SERVICE K-9 (guy's partner) 
753 BRAYTON AVE., CLEVELAND, OHIO 44113-4604 USA, V:216.861.7368, F:216.861.7368 
UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES VETERAN (VOLUNTEER) PEACE, ANTI-WAR, DEFENSIVE 
faith based non-profit corporation no. 389646, 501(c)(3), SINCE 1965, 
DONATE TO QUEST 
  
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won.           There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they  seem          invincible, but in the end, they always fall — think of  it,    always." -       Mahatma Gandhi 
  
http://www.disclosureproject.com  TRUTH  -  EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL    
      
( categories:  ) 
 
				
				 | 		
				
				
	
How much money did the city waste on filing false charges?
Wonder how much it cost the city to harass a property owner?
My guess- considering the cost of the judge, magistrate, other court employees, clerk of courts employees, inspector, city prosecutor's office, Tremont West Development employees, Councilman Cimperman- is a minimum of $10,000, probably closer to $20,000.
The numerous court appearances, meetings, inspections also nearly cost the small business owner his business.
help - need a video free upload for 333mg video like youtube
help - need a video free upload for 333mg video like youtube
yogi and guy - http://www.disclosureproject.com TRUTH - EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL http://www.nationalwardogsmonument.org