|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Hampton v. Lively
| 19CA9 | adverse possession, adverse use, sales contract, purchase price, permissive, manifest weight of the evidence | Hess | Lawrence |
9/28/2020
|
10/1/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4713 |
|
In re D.S.
| 20CA905 | INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL-FAILURE TO REQUEST CONTINUANCE - Conclusory allegations of prejudice are not sufficient to demonstrate ineffective assistance and counsel's failure to request a continuance did not result in ineffective assistance of counsel where the trial court's decision was amply supported and there was no showing that the trial court would have reached a different conclusion if trial counsel had requested a continuance.. | Smith | Pike |
9/24/2020
|
10/6/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4794 |
|
State v. Bartholomew
| 19CA29 | CRIMINAL-SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST - Probable cause for the defendant's arrest existed and thus the search incident to arrest was valid despite the fact that the arresting officer relied on a section of the criminal child enticement statue that had been previously declared unconstitutional, where the statute had been amended and reenacted at the time of the defendant's arrest. | Smith | Pickaway |
9/17/2020
|
9/25/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4611 |
|
State v. Thacker
| 18CA21 | rape, kidnapping, burglary, abduction, merger, firearm specification; manifest weight of the evidence; sufficiency of the evidence; other acts evidence; Evid.R. 404(B); Remmer hearing; outside communication with jury; motion for trial continuance; visual impairment; inability to assist defense; abuse of discretion; plain error; prejudice; ineffective assistance of counsel; hearsay; trial strategy; prosecutorial misconduct; vouching; motion for acquittal; venue; R.C 2901.12; cumulative error doctrine | Hess | Lawrence |
9/16/2020
|
9/28/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4620 |
|
State v. Bradford
| 20CA1109 | Ineffective assistance of counsel–trial counsel did not perform ineffectively in weapons-under-disability trial by failing to file a motion to suppress evidence or by failing to object to evidence that appellant had a prior felonious assault conviction; filing motion to suppress would not have had a reasonable chance of success, and successfully objecting to evidence that appellant had a prior felonious assault conviction would not have led to a different result; appellant’s conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence even though the state did not present direct evidence that appellant actually possessed a weapon; instead, circumstantial evidence showed that appellant constructively possessed the weapon; the weapon was located in a bedroom officers believed belonged to appellant based upon prescription pill bottles and other items that contained appellant’s name. | Abele | Adams |
9/14/2020
|
9/23/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4563 |
|
State v. Stapleton
| 19CA7 | Evidence–trial court did not plainly err by allowing state to introduce digital evidence obtained from cell phones and social media accounts; trial court did not plainly err by imposing multiple punishments for pandering obscenity and pandering material involving a minor offenses; trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel. | Abele | Pickaway |
9/10/2020
|
9/17/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4479 |
|
In re K.M.
| 20CA4 & 20CA6 | Trial court’s determination it was in the children’s best interest to grant permanent custody to children services agency is not against the manifest weight of the evidence; and appellants expressly waived R.C. 2151.35(B)(1)’s mandatory deadline requiring a juvenile court to dismiss a case without prejudice if the court fails to conduct a dispositional hearing within 90 days of the filing of the complaint alleging that a child is abused, neglected or dependent. | Abele | Highland |
9/9/2020
|
9/17/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4476 |
|
Mick v. New Holland
| 19CA14 | CIVIL-JURISDICTION-FINAL APPEALABLE ORDER - The court of appeals is required to sua sponte raise threshold jurisdictional issue even if not raised by parties. A trial court judgment that orders reinstatement and back pay without determining the amount of back pay to be paid does not constitute a final appealable order because the determination of damages with the requisite specificity is part of determining the action. | Smith | Pickaway |
9/8/2020
|
9/17/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4475 |
|
State v. Setty
| 20CA1106 | operating a motor vehicle under the influence; manifest weight of the evidence; juror impartiality; alternate juror; abuse of discretion; motion for mistrial; invited error doctrine; R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a); Crim.R. 24(G); R.C. 2945.29 | Hess | Adams |
9/1/2020
|
9/3/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4318 |
|
State v. Rings
| 19CA10 | Appellant's conviction for coercion was not supported by sufficient evidence where the evidence presented by the state, including text messages and photographs, did not indicate that appellant used the power of his office to make the alleged victim do anything that she did not want to do or had a legal right not to do. | Piper | Washington |
8/28/2020
|
9/8/2020
| 2020-Ohio-4342 |
|