In re Jones

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as In re Jones, 2003-Ohio-6131.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO VICTIMS OF CRIME DIVISION IN RE: JOHNNIE JONES : Case No. V2003-40674 JOHNNIE JONES : ORDER OF A THREECOMMISSIONER PANEL Applicant : : : : : : This appeal came to be heard before this panel of three commissioners on August 6, 2003 at 11:00 A.M. upon the applicant s deemed May 19, 2003 appeal from the June 12, 2003 Final Decision of the Attorney General. The Attorney General denied the applicant s claim because the applicant failed to prove that he qualified as a victim of criminally injurious conduct. The applicant alleged that he was a victim of arson on April 12, 2002. According to the claim file, the Basic Incident Report from the Cleveland Fire Division lists the cause of the fire as an electrical short circuit originating in the kitchen. Moreover, the report fails to indicate any incident related injuries. The applicant appealed the Attorney General s Final Decision. Neither the applicant nor anyone on his behalf appeared the hearing. An Assistant Attorney General attended the hearing and indicated that he rests on his Brief. The panel chairman concluded the hearing. Case No. V2003-40674 -1- ORDER From review of the file and with full and careful consideration given to all the information presented at the hearing, we find the June 12, 2003 decision of the Attorney General shall be affirmed. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT 1) The June 12, 2003 decision of the Attorney General is AFFIRMED; 2) This claim is DENIED and judgment is entered for the state of Ohio; 3) Costs are assumed by the court of claims victims of crime fund. _______________________________________ CLARK B. WEAVER, SR. Commissioner _______________________________________ DALE A. THOMPSON Commissioner _______________________________________ ASHER W. SWEENEY Commissioner ID #\1-dld-tad-090203 Filed 10-3-2003 Jr. Vol. 2251, Pgs. 107-108 To S.C. Reporter 11-19-2003

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.