In re Dulin
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as In re Dulin, 2007-Ohio-2272.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO VICTIMS OF CRIME DIVISION www.cco.state.oh.us IN RE: ANTHONY L. DULIN : Case No. V2006-20828 ANTHONY L. DULIN : Commissioners: Randi Ostry LeHoty, Presiding Gregory P. Barwell Karl C. Kerschner Applicant : : ORDER OF A THREECOMMISSIONER PANEL : : : : : {¶1} : The applicant filed a reparations application seeking reimbursement of expenses incurred with respect to an April 5, 2006 assault incident. On June 2, 2006, the Attorney General denied the applicant s claim pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(E) since the applicant was convicted of felony drug abuse on July 17, 1998, which is within ten years of the criminally injurious conduct. On June 27, 2006, the applicant filed a request for reconsideration. On July 20, 2006, the Attorney General determined that the previous decision warranted no modification. On August 18, 2006, the applicant filed a notice of appeal to the Attorney General s July 20, 2006 Final Decision. On November 16, 2006 at 10:55 A.M., this matter was heard before this panel of three commissioners. {¶2} Neither the applicant nor anyone on his behalf appeared at the hearing. An Assistant Attorney General attended the hearing and presented brief comments for the panel s consideration. The Assistant Attorney General reiterated her position for Case No. V2006-20828 denying the claim. -1- ORDER After a brief discussion of the claim, the panel chairperson concluded the hearing. {¶3} Revised Code 2743.60(E)(1)(a) states: Except as otherwise provided in division (E)(2) of this section, the attorney general, a panel of commissioners, or a judge of the court of claims shall not make an award to a claimant if any of the following applies: (a) The victim was convicted of a felony within ten years prior to the criminally injurious conduct that gave rise to the claim or is convicted of a felony during the pendency of the claim. {¶4} From review of the file and with full and careful consideration given to all the information presented at the hearing, we find the July 20, 2006 decision of the Attorney General shall be affirmed. {¶5} IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT {¶6} 1) The July 20, 2006 decision of the Attorney General is AFFIRMED; {¶7} 2) This claim is DENIED and judgment is rendered for the state of Ohio; {¶8} 3) Costs are assumed by the court of claims victims of crime fund. _______________________________________ RANDI OSTRY LE HOTY Presiding Commissioner _______________________________________ [Cite as In re Dulin, 2007-Ohio-2272.] GREGORY P. BARWELL Commissioner _______________________________________ KARL C. KERSCHNER Commissioner ID #\1-dld-tad-120406 A copy of the foregoing was personally served upon the Attorney General and sent by regular mail to Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney and to: Filed 3-2-2007 Jr. Vol. 2263, Pgs. 155-157 To S.C. Reporter 5-11-2007 Case No. V2006-20828 -1- ORDER
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
