COLUMBUS, Ohio — The state Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated an animal cruelty conviction of a man found guilty of pouring bleach down his apartment stairs, soaking an apparently stray kitten.

In a unanimous ruling, the court ruled that Ohio’s enhanced animal cruelty law for “companion animals” applies to all cats and dogs, even those not under an owner’s domain.

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, later diagnosed as likely bleach-induced ulceration. A veterinarian determined that the animal was stressed, but not in pain. Exposure to bleach put people at 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 a few steps and into the basement hallway to deter it.

He was charged and convicted of animal cruelty to a companion animal, a fifth-degree felony, as opposed to a more general (non-companion) animal cruelty offense. He was sentenced to nine months in prison. However, the Eighth District Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, ruling that the word “kept” means that a companion animal is merely a dog or cat in the care of a person.

That was the first time an Ohio appeals court came to that conclusion, said Tasha Forchione of the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office. She argued for a broad interpretation of “companion animals,” including stray or unhoused cats.

Ohio law defines a companion animal as an animal “kept in a dwelling, and any dog ​​or cat regardless of where kept, including a pet store.” The law is, as the judges put it, ‘not a model of clarity’.

Kyles argued that the cat was not a pet because it had no owner to “keep” it. Prosecutors argued for a broader interpretation that “any dog ​​or cat” is a companion animal. The court sided with the plaintiffs and remanded the case to lower courts.

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

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

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

“’Any’ means anything, and RC 959.131 defines ‘companion animal’ as including ‘any’ dog or cat.”