43
Plea deal could mean probation in dog-attack case
YOUNGSTOWN — The city man charged with a felony after his dog attacked a 10-year-old child walking to school has signed a plea agreement that likely could land him on probation instead of behind bars.
Dustin Anglin, 22, of South Heights Avenue, faced a felony charge of not properly confining or restraining a vicious dog that has caused physical harm.
He was scheduled for a pretrial hearing Tuesday before Judge R. Scott Krichbaum of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court and entered into the plea agreement that reduces the felony to a misdemeanor charge of failure to confine or restrain a dog.
Atty. Jim Melone, representing Anglin, said Anglin will be sentenced Feb. 3.
Anglin faces up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. Prosecutors, under the terms of the plea agreement, however, are recommending probation and that Anglin pay any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses to the bite victim’s family.
Toris Gonner and his 9-year-old sister, Vinnasia McGary, were walking to a school-bus stop at South Heights and Midlothian Boulevard in mid-September when a large brown and white dog, believed to be a pit bull, and a smaller dog ran out as the two kids approached the corner.
Witnesses said the large dog immediately went after Toris, biting him on the leg and then running to Anglin’s small house nearest to the corner.
Vinnasia said she remembers the dog’s coming out and biting her brother. She said she was able to run and jump into a neighbor’s car when the dog came out.
Judge Krichbaum said prosecutors did not produce any medical evidence to the court that would show a serious medical harm caused by the dog. He also said there would have been concerns over proving the dog is a pit bull at trial.
The judge said the law is clear on labeling a dog vicious.
“The statute allows for proof by a history of the dog being vicious, and that is not the case in this situation, or by proving the dog is a particular breed. That is not as simple as it sounds,” the judge said.
Robert Bush, an assistant county prosecutor, said if prosecutors had gone forward to trial, he is not sure a jury would have seen the wounds on the child as a “serious physical harm” — an element needed in the felony charge.
He said the misdemeanor charge, which requires proof of less physical harm, was appropriate.
“I believe the end result here was suitable,” Bush added.
jgoodwin@vindy.com