The Ohio Supreme Court rules that the animal cruelty law applies to all cats and dogs – including strays

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The state Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated an animal cruelty conviction against a man found guilty of pouring bleach over his apartment stairs, drenching what appeared to be a stray kitten.

In a unanimous opinion, the court ruled that Ohio's enhanced “pet” animal cruelty law applies to all cats and dogs, even those without an owner.

In October 2021, Cleveland Police responded to a call at an apartment complex. They found an eight-month-old kitten without a collar, meowing loudly and soaked in liquid bleach. His paws were red and swollen, which was later diagnosed as likely ulcers caused by bleach. A veterinarian determined the animal was stressed but not in pain. Exposure to bleach posed a risk of illness or death.

Alonzo Kyles, 37, told officers he was afraid of the cat and couldn't get it to leave the building. So he poured bleach — a toxic substance for pets — out his door, down some stairs and into the basement hallway to scare the animal away.

He was charged and convicted of animal cruelty to a service animal, a felony of the fifth degree, as opposed to more general animal cruelty (without a service animal). He was sentenced to nine months in prison. However, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the conviction, finding that the word “kept” meant that a pet was only a dog or cat cared for by a person.

According to Tasha Forchione of the Cuyahoga County District Attorney's Office, this was the first time an Ohio appeals court had reached this conclusion. She argued for a broad interpretation of the term “pet,” including stray or unhoused cats.

Ohio law defines a pet as an animal “kept in a dwelling, as well as any dog ​​or cat, regardless of where they are kept, including a pet store.” The law is, as the justices put it, “ no model of clarity”.

Kyles argued that the cat wasn't a pet because it didn't have an owner to “keep” it. Prosecutors argued for a broader interpretation that “every dog ​​and cat” is a pet. The court sided with prosecutors and sent the case back to the lower courts.

Stephen Hardwick, an attorney for Kyles, emphasized in an earlier statement that Kyles did not pour bleach on the cat. Rather, he poured a diluted bleach mixture down the stairs to get her to leave because he was “afraid of spreading COVID and cats.” He declined to comment on the court's ruling.

Through a spokesman, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Michael O'Malley thanked the court for its “basic common sense” and said its unanimous ruling speaks volumes.

Judge Patrick F. Fischer wrote in the opinion that the state law was not clearly stated but was intended to protect all cats and dogs.

“'Everyone' means all, and RC 959.131 defines 'companion animal' as 'any' dog or cat.”