| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
State v. McLellan
| 1-24-61 | Speedy Trial; R.C. 2945.71; R.C. 2945.72; R.C. 2945.73; Sufficiency of Evidence; Manifest Weight; Possession of Drugs. Defendant-appellant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial was not violated. Defendant-appellant’s possession-of-drugs convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. | Miller | Allen |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-402 |
|
In re P.S.
| 1-25-15, 1-25-16, 1-25-20 | Permanent Custody. Trial court did not err by granting permanent custody of the parties' children to children's services agency. | Waldick | Allen |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-403 |
|
State v. Metzger
| 1-25-19 | Aggravated Trafficking in Drugs; Engaging in a Pattern of Corrupt Activity; Sufficiency of the evidence; Manifest weight of the evidence; Warrantless search of vehicle; Cross-examination of witness; Qualifying a witness as an expert. The judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed. | Waldick | Allen |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-404 |
|
One Energy Ents., Inc. v. Allen Twp. Bd. of Trustees
| 5-25-02 & 5-25-03 | R.C. 121.22; Open Meetings Act; Remedies for Open Meetings Act violations. Trial court did not err by determining that Trustees violated Open Meetings Act in some respects but not others. Trial court properly issued limited injunction. | Waldick | Hancock |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-405 |
|
Whitman v. Whitman
| 8-24-47 | Calculation of Child Support; Abuse of Discretion; Contempt; Void Purge Condition; R.C. 3105.171(I); Allocation of Tax Exemption; R.C. 3119.82. In this post-decree proceeding, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in the calculation of child support. The mother-appellee was employed to full capacity and a deviation was warranted after consideration of the factors set forth in R.C. 3119.23. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding the father-appellant in contempt and imposing penalties for the contempt. The trial court’s award of attorney fees in excess of $400 is an abuse of discretion. A local rule of court limits reasonable fees to $400 in the absence of professional testimony post-decree actions involving contempt. The trial court’s purge condition requiring the father-appellant to comply with all court orders in the future is void because it does not properly allow the contemnor to purge the contempt. The trial court did not modify the terms of the parties’ divorce decree in violation of R.C. 3105.171(I). The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence that was properly authenticated. The trial court’s allocation of the tax emption to the nonresidential parent without any consideration of the child’s best interest and the factors set forth in R.C. 3119.82 is an abuse of discretion. | Zimmerman | Logan |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-406 |
|
State v. Krouse
| 8-25-15 | Contrary to Law; R.C. 2953.08(G)(2); Clear and Convincing Evidence. The Supreme Court of Ohio has defined the phrase "contrary to law" in R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b) to mean "in violation of statute or legal regulations at a given time." Clear and convincing evidence is that which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established. On appeal, reviewing courts are not permitted to substitute their judgment for that of the trial court in weighing the factors listed in R.C. 2929.12 and principles listed in R.C. 2929.11. | Willamowski | Logan |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-407 |
|
State v. Nuniviller
| 14-25-12 | Community Control; Tolling; R.C. 2929.15(A)(1). The trial court acted within its authority when it ordered the termination of defendant-appellant's community-control supervision and the imposition of a prison sentence on the original charges despite the five-year period of supervision having ended. | Miller | Union |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-408 |
|
State v. Krouse
| 14-25-33 | Community Control Violations; Consecutive Sentences. The trial court did not err in imposing a twelve month prison term for violating of community control by committing a new third degree felony. The trial court erred by ordering the prison term for the violation to be served consecutive to the new conviction in a new county when no notice was given that the sentence could be ordered to be served consecutively. | Willamowski | Union |
2/9/2026
|
2/9/2026
| 2026-Ohio-409 |
|
Doster v. Doster
| 12-24-08 | Best Interest; Shared Parenting Plan; R.C. 3109.04; Contempt of Court; Impossibility of Performance; Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel; Retained Counsel. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by terminating the parties’ shared parenting plan and designating plaintiff-appellee as the residential parent and legal custodian of the parties’ minor children. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding the defendant-appellee in contempt of court for failing to facilitate parenting time. Defendant-appellant did not have a constitutional right to counsel and is not entitled to claim ineffective assistance of retained counsel. | Miller | Putnam |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-303 |
|
State v. Rideout
| 14-25-23, 14-25-24 | Consecutive Sentences; R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)(c). The trial court's decision to run the sentences for the convictions consecutively was not contrary to law. | Miller | Union |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-304 |
|
State v. Jones
| 3-25-12 | Manifest Weight of the Evidence; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel; Trial Strategy. The verdicts were supported by the evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Counsel's assistance was not ineffective despite picking a trial strategy that was not successful. Trial strategy is not the basis for a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel. | Willamowski | Crawford |
2/2/2026
|
2/2/2026
| 2026-Ohio-302 |
|
State v. Burroughs
| 3-25-23, 3-25-24 | Community control; Review of findings that community control was violated; Termination of community control; Imposition of prison sentences for violations of community control. The trial court did not err in finding that defendant-appellant had violated the terms of community control and in imposing incarceration as a result. | Waldick | Crawford |
1/20/2026
|
1/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-166 |
|
State v. Laidlaw
| 14-25-28 | Felonious Assault; Self-Defense; Manifest Weight of the Evidence; Verdict Form; Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel. The jury did not lose its way in rejecting the defendant-appellant’s claim of self-defense. There is no requirement for a separate jury finding or verdict form regarding self-defense. The defendant-appellant’s trial counsel was not ineffective in his handling of the verdict forms or in failing to request an instruction on the inferior degree offense of aggravated assault. | Zimmerman | Union |
1/20/2026
|
1/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-168 |
|
State v. Moore
| 9-24-56 | Law-Of-The-Case Doctrine. Under the law-of-the-case doctrine, the decision of an appellate court in a prior appeal will ordinarily be followed in a later appeal in the same case and court absent extraordinary circumstances. Since the issue of double jeopardy was fully briefed, argued, and decided in the defendant-appellant’s interlocutory appeal, we adhere to the law-of-the-case doctrine and decline to revisit our prior decision. | Zimmerman | Marion |
1/20/2026
|
1/20/2026
| 2026-Ohio-167 |
|
Deitz v. Shelby Cty. Clerk of Court
| 17-25-10 | Administrative Search Warrant; Trespass; R.C. 2506.04; Appellate record. A person who enters onto a property with the authorization of the landowner does not commit trespass. R.C. 2506.04 provides the standards of review for decisions or orders that are subject to R.C. 2506.01(A). Appellate review is limited to the matters in the record. | Willamowski | Shelby |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-63 |
|
In re K.S.
| 14-25-13 | Sufficiency; Manifest Weight of the Evidence; Rape; R.C. R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b); Confrontation Clause; Evid.R. 803(4); Child Competency; Evid.R. 807; Remote Testimony; R.C. 2152.81; Harmless Error; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel. The adjudicated delinquent child-appellant’s rape adjudications are based on sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Because the child victim’s statements in a Child Advocacy Center (“CAC”) interview were primarily for medical diagnosis, they were admissible under Evid.R. 803(4) and were nontestimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause. As to the admission of any arguably testimonial evidence, since it was a bench trial, it is presumed that the trial court did not consider any inadmissible evidence for any purpose. Because the child victim’s CAC interview was admissible under Evid.R. 803(4), no separate competency determination was required under Evid.R. 807. The trial court erred by concluding that R.C. 2152.81 automatically requires remote testimony based on the age of the witness; however, such error was harmless. The adjudicated delinquent child-appellant’s trial counsel was not ineffective. | Zimmerman | Union |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-79 |
|
Capital One, N.A. v. Jones
| 5-25-14 | Summary Judgment; Breach of Contract; Action on an Account; Evid.R. 803(6); Civ.R. 37; Civ.R. 56(F). The trial court did not err by granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff-appellee on its claim for unpaid credit card debt. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant-appellant's motion to compel discovery or failing to impose sanctions. | Zimmerman | Hancock |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-62 |
|
State v. Holdcraft
| 3-25-10 | The defendant-appellant’s sentence is contrary to law because the trial court failed to comply with the mandatory sex offender registration notification requirements of R.C. 2929.19 and R.C. 2950.03 at the time of sentencing. | Zimmerman | Crawford |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-61 |
|
State v. Meeks
| 16-24-12; 16-24-13 | Evid.R. 611(A); Abuse of Discretion; Manifest Weight of the Evidence; Consecutive Sentences; R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). The trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the State to recall the victim for the limited purpose of identifying the appellant-defendant in the courtroom. The defendant-appellant’s rape conviction in count three is not against the manifest weight of the evidence because it is well within the province of the jury to find the testimony of the victim more credible than that of the appellant-defendant. The trial court made the appropriate R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings necessary to impose consecutive sentences and the record supports the trial court’s findings. | Zimmerman | Wyandot |
1/12/2026
|
1/12/2026
| 2026-Ohio-80 |
|
State v. Malloy
| 1-25-02 | Repeat-Violent-Offender Specification; R.C. 2924.149; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel; Evid.R. 611(A); Constitutional Right to Testify. The trial court did not err by determining the defendant-appellant’s status as a repeat violent offender after the jury found him guilty of the underlying criminal charge. The defendant-appellant’s trial counsel was not ineffective because the trial court reasonably controlled the mode and manner of the presentation of evidence of the defendant-appellant’s prior convictions. Nothing in the record suggests that the defendant-appellant wished to testify and was denied the opportunity to do so. | Zimmerman | Allen |
1/5/2026
|
1/5/2026
| 2026-Ohio-14 |