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 180 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Stapleton CA2020-12-133Appellant's sentence was not contrary to law where the trial court considered the requisite statutes, sentenced appellant within the statutory range, and properly imposed postrelease control. While the trial court did not cite or specifically reference the sentencing statutes during the sentencing hearing, the record clearly demonstrates the trial court properly considered the necessary statutory considerations before imposing sentence. PiperButler 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3281
State v. Rogers CA2021-02-010The Reagan Tokes Law does not violate an offender's right to due process, the offender's constitutional rights to trial by jury, or the separation-of-powers doctrine.M. PowellButler 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3282
State v. Stokes CA2021-03-026; CA2021-03-027Appellant's sentence was not contrary to law where the trial court imposed postconviction relief, sentenced appellant within the statutory range, and properly considered all sentencing factors. PiperButler 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3283
State v. White CA2020-07-039The trial court did not commit plain error in failing to consider the offender's ability to pay restitution because Marsy's Law requires full and timely restitution to all victims, and supersedes the statutory requirement that the trial court consider the offender's ability to pay. Consecutive sentences were not clearly and convincingly contrary to law and were supported by the record where the offender caused a significant amount of economic harm through his crimes, making a single prison term inadequate to reflect the seriousness of his conduct, and was not disproportionate to the danger the offender poses to the public. Trial counsel's decision to stipulate to the restitution amount was a strategic decision and did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. HendricksonClermont 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3284
State v. Lemmings CA2021-01-001The trial court's imposition of consecutive sentences was supported by the record and the aggregate and individual sentences imposed following appellant's guilty plea to four counts of felonious assault with a deadly weapon did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment as the individual sentences were not grossly disproportionate to their respective offenses. HendricksonClinton 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3285
State v. Taste CA2020-06-012The trial court properly denied appellant's motion to suppress where appellant made statements to a trooper after impliedly waiving his right to silence because appellant was given warnings regarding his right to remain silent but chose to answer some of the questions posed by the trooper. The trooper did not need to reissue the warnings because only two hours had passed between the initial warnings and the time when appellant chose to answer some of the questions. PiperMadison 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3286
Wren v. Hawkins CA2021-03-005The juvenile court did not err finding that there had not been a change in circumstances based on the testimony presented and therefore did not err in denying Mother's motion for change of custody. HendricksonMadison 9/20/2021 9/20/2021 2021-Ohio-3287
State v. Bolden CA2021-04-039Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 9/13/2021 9/13/2021 2021-Ohio-3144
State v. Deck CA2020-10-066Appellant's conviction for rape of a child under the age of ten with a finding that he used force was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the victim testified appellant anally raped him when he was eight or nine years old. In addition, the force requirement is different when the victim is a child, and accounts for the fact that adults can compel children to submit to sexual conduct by means of psychological coercion or use of authority over the child. HendricksonWarren 9/13/2021 9/13/2021 2021-Ohio-3145
State v. Wyatt CA2020-11-076The trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to suppress as the totality of the circumstances demonstrated that law enforcement had reasonable and articulable suspicion to effectuate a Terry stop on appellant in order to investigate the possibility of criminal activity and the officers acted lawfully in conducting protective pat downs of appellant for weapons. Contraband found in appellant's pants pocket was lawfully seized pursuant to the plain-feel doctrine. HendricksonWarren 9/13/2021 9/13/2021 2021-Ohio-3146