Seal of the State of Ohio. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. Line Drawing of the Ohio Judicial Center. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page.
Spacer image

The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System

Opinion Search Filter Settings
Use standard search logic for the Opinion Text Search (full-text search). To search the entire web site click here
Opinion Text Search:   What is Opinion Text Search?
Search Truncation Warning:
Source:    What is a Source?
Year Decided From:
Year Decided To:    What is Year Decided?
Year Decided Range Warning:
County:    What is County?
Case Number:    What is Case Number?
Author:    What is Author?
Topics and Issues:    What are Topics and Issues?
WebCite No: -Ohio-    What is a Web Cite No.? WebCite and Citation are unique document searches. If a value is entered in the WebCite or Citation field, all other search filters are ignored. If values are entered in both the WebCite and Citation fields, only the WebCite search filter is applied.
Citation:    What is Citation?
This search returned 19 rows. Rows per page: 
12
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Boyd 28490A detective did not conduct a search implicating the Fourth Amendment when he looked into appellant’s vehicle located in a store’s parking lot. The detective, while looking into the vehicle, observed what he immediately recognized as probable cocaine. This plain view discovery allowed the detective to conduct a warrantless seizure of the probable contraband which, upon testing, was confirmed to be cocaine. Additionally, the trial court reasonably concluded that the tow was necessary in order to avoid either theft or vandalism since the subject vehicle, which was parked in private business lot, could readily be placed in safekeeping in a police-controlled lot. The trial court properly overruled appellant’s motion to suppress. Judgment affirmed.DonovanMontgomery 1/17/2020 1/17/2020 2020-Ohio-125
In re C.M.B. 28523The trial court did not err in finding by clear and convincing evidence that awarding permanent custody of Mother’s children to Montgomery County Children Services was in the children’s best interest. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a third continuance of the dispositional hearing to allow a home study to be completed for a Florida relative. Judgment affirmed.HallMontgomery 1/17/2020 1/17/2020 2020-Ohio-126
State v. Mukes 28350Appellant’s conviction for felony murder was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.WelbaumMontgomery 1/17/2020 1/17/2020 2020-Ohio-127
Neal v. Lilly 28082 & 28400The trial court did not err in awarding damages to appellee for temporary injury to real property caused by appellant. The trial court also did not err by overruling appellant’s motion for a new damages trial. Judgments affirmed.HallMontgomery 1/17/2020 1/17/2020 2020-Ohio-128
Stuck v. Miami Valley Hosp. 28233The trial court did not err in granting partial summary judgment as to appellant’s cause of action seeking a declaratory judgment that medical providers were negligent per se or that strict liability or res ipsa loquitur applied to their actions. Although a pressure ulcer that decedent developed may have qualified as a “hospital acquired condition” or “never event” under federal law governing Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement, such federal law did not establish a standard of care for private medical negligence actions and did not alter the elements necessary to prove such a claim. Appellees’ assignments of error on cross-appeal challenging the trial court’s Civ.R. 54(B) certification of its partial summary judgment decision are overruled, and their motions to strike are granted in part and denied in part. Judgment affirmed.FroelichMontgomery 1/17/2020 1/17/2020 2020-Ohio-129
State v. Wooten 2019-CA-8Anders appeal. No non-frivolous issues exist relating to the revocation of appellant’s community control for domestic violence and the imposition of the maximum 18-month sentence. Judgment affirmed.FroelichChampaign 1/10/2020 1/10/2020 2020-Ohio-49
State v. Carr 28360The trial court did not err in denying appellant’s public records request for documents pursuant to R.C. 149.43(B)(8). Appellant failed to identify a pending proceeding to which the records would be material, and he did not indicate how the records would be material to any justiciable claim. Judgment affirmed.WelbaumMontgomery 1/10/2020 1/10/2020 2020-Ohio-42
State v. Chinn 28345The jury, not the trial court, made the factual determination resulting in appellant’s death penalty eligibility. Thus, Hurst v. Florida, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016) is not applicable. Further, Hurst v. Florida does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review. Judgment affirmed.TuckerMontgomery 1/10/2020 1/10/2020 2020-Ohio-43
State v. Ewing 28391Appellant’s sentence is not contrary to law, and it is not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. Judgment affirmed.TuckerMontgomery 1/10/2020 1/10/2020 2020-Ohio-44
State v. Murray 28373The officer had a reasonable, articulable suspicion that appellant had been driving while impaired and was justified in administering the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) field sobriety test. The officer administered the HGN test in substantial compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards. The totality of circumstances, including the HGN test result, established probable cause to arrest appellant for operating a vehicle while under the influence. Judgment affirmed.TuckerMontgomery 1/10/2020 1/10/2020 2020-Ohio-45
12