State v. Yontz
SimpleOriginal

Summary

In this Ohio Supreme Court case, Yontz challenged a probation rule banning Suboxone despite his opioid use disorder. He complied but argued it violated disability rights. The court found the order wasn’t appealable, vacating the case.

2022 | State Juristiction

State v. Yontz

Keywords Ohio Supreme Court; Yontz; probation; Suboxone; opioid use disorder; disability rights; appealable; case vacated; medication assisted treatment; Ohio
Open Case as PDF

Case Summary

This case, originating in the Ohio Supreme Court, involved a challenge by Yontz to a probation condition prohibiting the use of Suboxone, a medication for opioid use disorder. Despite his compliance with the probationary conditions, Yontz contended that the ban violated his rights under disability law. The court's decision ultimately vacated the case, finding the probation order non-appealable at that stage of the proceedings.

Open Case as PDF

Case Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court addressed the appealability of a probation order restricting Suboxone access for an individual with opioid use disorder. The appellant, Mr. Yontz, argued the restriction violated his disability rights, despite his compliance with the order. The court determined the probation order was not immediately appealable, resulting in the case's dismissal.

Open Case as PDF

The Yontz Case: Probation and Medication

A recent Ohio Supreme Court case involved a challenge to a probation rule. The rule prohibited the use of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction. The individual on probation, Mr. Yontz, argued that this ban violated his disability rights, given his opioid use disorder. While he obeyed the rule, he still challenged its legality. The court ultimately decided that Mr. Yontz could not appeal the probation order, resulting in the dismissal of the case.

Open Case as PDF

The Case of Yontz and Suboxone

A man named Yontz in Ohio had a problem with opioid addiction. As part of his probation, he wasn't allowed to take Suboxone, a medicine that helps with addiction. Yontz followed the rules, but he thought the rule was unfair because it was against his rights as someone with a disability. The Supreme Court in Ohio said that this particular part of his case couldn't be appealed, so they ended it.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

201 N.E.3d 867 (2022)

Highlights