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?
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 160 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
In re D.D. CA2024-03-005Abandonment is not solely about physical visitation. A parent can show continued interest and involvement in a child's life through letters, gifts, or other forms of communication. A court does not err in determining that a child could not be placed with a parent within a reasonable period of time or should not be placed with the parent at all when the record shows that the parent failed to remedy conditions causing the child's removal, suffered from chronic mental illness and substance abuse, lacked commitment to the child, and abandoned the child. Granting permanent custody to a children services agency may be in a child's best interest where the child had a strong bond with his foster family, the foster family wants to adopt the child, the child has no real bond with the parents, the parents have not addressed the issues that led to the child's removal and are not prepared to parent him within a reasonable timeframe, and the parents abandoned the child.M. PowellPreble 7/22/2024 7/22/2024 2024-Ohio-2769
State v. Oberschlake CA2024-01-001The trial court did not err in sentencing appellant to consecutive prison terms where the trial court made the necessary consecutive sentencing findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and the record supported those findings.PiperClermont 7/22/2024 7/22/2024 2024-Ohio-2764
State v. Bryars CA2023-11-099The imposition of consecutive sentences was not contrary to law where the court made the requisite findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and the findings were not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. The trial court erred in the imposition of postrelease control where the court failed to advise appellant at the sentencing hearing of the term of supervision, that the supervision was discretionary, and of the consequences of violating postrelease control. Notice of postrelease control provided at the plea hearing and the notice set forth in the sentencing entry did not correct the court's failure to impose postrelease control at the sentencing hearing.HendricksonWarren 7/22/2024 7/22/2024 2024-Ohio-2765
State v. Armbruster CA2023-08-056Appellant's convictions did not merge, as there were two separate victims. Offenses do not merge when the defendant's conduct constitutes offenses involving separate victims or if the harm that results is separate and identifiable. Appellant's convictions for felonious assault and the peace-officer specifications are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. In addition, the jury verdict forms comply with R.C. 2945.75(A)(2) where the verdict forms set forth the element that transforms each count of felonious assault from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony. Namely, that appellant discharged a firearm at a peace officer while committing the offense of felonious assault. WITH Dissenting Opinion.M. PowellClermont 7/22/2024 7/22/2024 2024-Ohio-2763
State v. Barbarawi CA2023-07-077; CA2023-07-078Conviction for breaking and entering was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.M. PowellButler 7/15/2024 7/15/2024 2024-Ohio-2665
State v. Hufford CA2023-12-113Trial court's decision denying appellant's motion to seal the record of his 2007 conviction for one count of fifth-degree felony importuning was reversed and remanded for further proceedings where trial court did not adhere to the requirements of R.C. 2953.32 by holding a hearing on appellant's motion where it was to make certain factual and legal determinations, nor did the trial court provide any explanation for its decision finding appellant was an appropriate candidate to have his record sealed, but was nevertheless statutorily ineligible to do so, so as to allow the appeals court to conduct a meaningful review of the trial court's decision.S. PowellWarren 7/15/2024 7/15/2024 2024-Ohio-2667
State v. Abrams CA2023-12-082Appellant's conviction for two counts of first-degree misdemeanor endangering children in violation of R.C. 2919.22(A) was supported by sufficient evidence where appellant waited upwards of 20 minutes before calling 9-1-1 for help after his one- and two-year old daughters had access to and were seen with his mental health medication in their hands and mouths, thereby created a substantial risk to their health and safety.S. PowellClermont 7/15/2024 7/15/2024 2024-Ohio-2666
State v. Gross CA2023-10-092Defendant's sentence for seventeen drug-related, felony convictions of the third and fifth must be reversed because the trial court did not announce postrelease control sanctions at the sentencing hearing, the postrelease control sanction exceeded the statutory max of two years, and because the trial court did not provide the defendant with notice of what circumstances in his case overcame the presumption that his sentences should be served concurrently. However, the trial court correctly did not merge any of the defendant's convictions because different drugs in the same schedule, and even within the same subsection in a schedule, can support separate convictions because each drug has independent significance from the other.PiperWarren 7/8/2024 7/8/2024 2024-Ohio-2598
State v. Philpot CA2023-07-081Appellant's convictions for gross sexual imposition were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. There is no requirement that there be direct testimony regarding sexual arousal or gratification. The jury was free to infer what appellant's motivation was in making physical contact with the victims. Further, although appellant alleged the trial court admitted improper hearsay, he failed to identify which statements he believes were objectionable. Appellant failed to comply with App.R. 12(A)(2) and 16(A)(7) by failing to identify the purported errors and to support any argument with citations to the record. In addition, appellant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel. The extent and scope of examination or cross-examination clearly falls within the ambit of trial strategy. Appellant's remaining arguments are vague, conclusory, and unsupported by the record.PiperButler 7/8/2024 7/8/2024 2024-Ohio-2596
In re K.K. CA2023-03-025; CA2023-03-026; CA2023-03-027Father appeals from a juvenile court decision adjudicating his children dependent. Failure to strictly comply with App.R. 3(D) was harmless error. Clear and convincing evidence supported adjudication of dependency.ByrneButler 7/8/2024 7/8/2024 2024-Ohio-2595
Total Quality Logistics, L.L.C. v. BBI Logistics, L.LC. CA2023-11-076Defendant third-party freight broker and its current employee were not entitled to attorneys' fees because, among other reasons, the trial court dismissed the misappropriation claim without considering it and thus made no finding that plaintiff prosecuted its claims in bad faith. Additionally, the trial court improperly dismissed plaintiff third-party freight broker's claims on the basis that the two-year noncompete was not enforceable because plaintiff (and public) had an interest in preventing a former, higher-level employee that it had cultivated from leaving the company and unfairly competing against plaintiff by, among other things, soliciting former clients. Defendant former employee also experienced no undue hardship by enforcing the noncompete.S. PowellClermont 7/8/2024 7/8/2024 2024-Ohio-2597
Total Quality Logistics, L.L.C. v. Sallah, Inc. CA2023-11-074The trial court did not err by finding that an independent dispatcher had apparent authority to bind a trucking company to rate confirmations, as this finding was supported by the manifest weight of the evidence.PiperClermont 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2529
Hamblin v. Trustees of St. Clair Twp. CA2024-02-035The common pleas court abused its discretion denying appellant's motion requesting the court reconsider its decision dismissing his administrative appeal for want of prosecution, which appellant improperly styled as a motion for relief judgment, based upon appellant's trial counsel's failure to appear before the court at a single status report hearing following a mishap in scheduling that left the hearing date off of appellant's trial counsel's calendar.S. PowellButler 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2525
Abdusamatova v. Abdulhakov CA2023-12-115Ohio law is clear and unequivocal that a power of attorney does not authorize a person to act as an attorney at law; therefore, husband's attempt on appeal to argue a violation of his mother's rights based on the denial of a motion in the trial court is unauthorized practice of law.S. PowellWarren 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2533
State v. Holmes CA2024-03-036Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2526
Ehlers v. Thomas CA2023-07-052; CA2023-07-053The magistrate's CSPO which ordered appellants to delete and not post any internet content which referenced appellee, a county coroner staff member, by name and prohibited appellants from possessing any firearms violated the First and Second Amendments. A blanket prohibition on using an individual's name on internet posts is a content-based restriction and is not the least restrictive means to protect a legitimate government interest because it prohibits use of appellee's name in all contexts. There is no compelling state interest in providing a public official with such anonymity. In addition, the weapon restriction lacked a sufficient nexus with the conduct the trial court was attempting to prevent because there was no evidence that Appellants used or threatened the use of a firearm against appellee or that they even owned a firearm.HendricksonWarren 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2531
State v. Howard CA2023-09-067The defendant was not improperly denied a preliminary hearing in his municipal court case, which was dismissed. Even if he were, the defendant only appealed his common pleas conviction, a separate case. Additionally, a criminal defendant is not aggrieved by the dismissal of charges against him and thus has no standing to make an appeal. Finally, by pleading no contest, a defendant admits to the truth of the facts alleged in an indictment, information, or complaint. This negates the need for a preliminary hearing to determine whether sufficient facts exist to send a case to the grand jury for indictment.HendricksonClermont 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2527
State v. Halbert CA2024-01-003The trial court did not err by ordering appellant to serve his 15-year-to-life prison sentence he received for murdering his cellmate consecutively to the prison sentence that appellant was serving at the time of the murder.S. PowellWarren 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2534
State v. Bumpass CA2023-10-068Appellant's conviction for tampering with evidence and abuse of a corpse was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a mistrial following the emotional outbursts of the decedent's mother during her direct and cross-examination.M. PowellClermont 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2528
State v. Richardson CA2024-02-008Anders no error.Per CuriamClermont 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2530
Fifth Third Bank v. Ballard CA2023-07-080Appellant's appeal from the trial court's decision denying his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment dismissed as moot in an action in foreclosure where the trial court had already confirmed the sale and distribution of the sale proceeds.S. PowellButler 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2523
State v. Hernandez CA2024-02-034Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2524
State v. Westberry CA2023-10-086The trial court did not err by finding appellant guilty of one count of second-degree felony aggravated arson in violation of R.C. 2909.02(A)(2) as there was sufficient evidence that appellant, by means of fire, knowingly caused physical harm to the home where he had been residing with his long term on-again-off-again ex-girlfriend and mother of two of his children by setting a bag of trash and other debris on fire after placing those items in a firepit located two to three feet away from the home's back sliding glass door. The trial court's verdict was also not against the manifest weight of the evidence.S. PowellWarren 7/1/2024 7/1/2024 2024-Ohio-2532
Maanu v. Bobie CA2024-01-002The trial court's decision classifying certain debts as non-marital was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the exhibits produced by appellant were dated after the valuation date established by the court and appellant failed to challenge the trial court's finding that the debts were incurred for personal, non-marital purposes.S. PowellButler 6/24/2024 6/24/2024 2024-Ohio-2395
State v. Baldwin CA2023-10-087 & CA2023-10-088Appellant's convictions for grand theft were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the state demonstrated appellant entered into contracts to repair two homeowners' roofs and accepted insurance proceeds for the repairs, but appellant failed to communicate with the homeowners' after receiving the payments, failed to deliver any roofing materials, and failed to do any repair work on the homes. The trial court properly admitted a third homeowner's testimony about her similar experiences in contracting with appellant for unperformed roofing repairs pursuant to Evid.R. 404(B), as such evidence was relevant in demonstrating appellant's intent and the absence of mistake or lack of accident.HendricksonWarren 6/24/2024 6/24/2024 2024-Ohio-2397
State v. Cornett CA2023-11-077The trial court did not err by not holding a Daubert hearing on the reliability of appellant's SCRAM ankle bracelet where appellant admitted to violating the terms of her community control by tampering with the bracelet.PiperClermont 6/24/2024 6/24/2024 2024-Ohio-2396
State v. Brummett CA2023-10-085Appellant's conviction for one count of second-degree felony felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2) following a bench trial was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where appellant was observed pointing a firearm at the victim and the circumstantial evidence indicated appellant then shot the firearm in the victim's direction.S. PowellWarren 6/18/2024 6/18/2024 2024-Ohio-2332
Kienow v. Dir., Dept. of Job & Family Servs. CA2024-01-005The decision to disallow appellant's two applications for unemployment compensation benefits in accordance with R.C. 4141.29(D)(2)(a) was affirmed where the finding that appellant had quit her job without just cause was supported by the record and therefore not unlawful, unreasonable, or against the manifest weight of the evidence.S. PowellButler 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2306
State v. Baca CA2024-02-009The trial court's decision denying appellant's motion requesting he be afforded certain driving privileges upon the trial court finding it lacked jurisdiction to rule on appellant's motion pursuant to R.C. 4511.197(A) was reversed and the matter remanded to the trial court with instructions to consider appellant's motion instead under R.C. Chapter 4510.S. PowellClermont 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2304
Midlam v. Demartino CA2023-12-018Trial court did not err in denying appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus where the petition did not contain any facially valid claims. Res judicata barred appellant from relitigating issues through his habeas petition that were already adjudicated in his previous appeals.HendricksonMadison 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2301
State v. Haley CA2023-03-005Defendant appeals convictions for murder and felonious assault. The jury did not lose its way in finding that the state disproved the defendant's claim of self-defense. The evidence established that defendant was at all times the aggressor in the interaction with the victim and lacked a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary. No prosecutorial misconduct where comments during closing argument were fair comment on evidence at trial.ByrneClinton 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2303
Settlers Walk Home Owners' Assn. v. Phoenix Settlers Walk CA2023-06-045The trial court abused its discretion in concluding that postjudgment interest did not accrue on a restitution award because the judgment entry did not resolve all claims between the parties. R.C. 1343.03 does not require a final appealable order prior to the imposition of postjudgment interest.HendricksonWarren 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2296
Hill v. Dorger CA2023-10-071The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Seller's Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment. Seller failed to demonstrate that he has any meritorious claim or defense, or that he was entitled to relief under one of the grounds stated in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5).PiperClermont 6/17/2024 6/17/2024 2024-Ohio-2305
State v. Dollar CA2024-02-020Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 6/10/2024 6/10/2024 2024-Ohio-2208
State v. Rojas CA2023-07-007; CA2023-06-006The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in finding that appellant, who was 19.5 years old at the time of the court's decision, was not amenable to rehabilitation in the juvenile system. The factors in favor of bindover to adult court set forth in R.C. 2152.12(D) outweighed the factors against bindover set forth in R.C. 2152.12(E). In weighing the factors, the trial court was entitled to find the state's expert's opinion more credible than the defense's expert's opinion on amenability.HendricksonPreble 6/10/2024 6/10/2024 2024-Ohio-2209
State v. Brummett CA2023-10-085Appellant's conviction for one count of second-degree felony felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(2) following a bench trial was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where appellant was observed pointing a firearm at the victim and the circumstantial evidence indicated appellant then shot the firearm in the victim's direction.S. PowellWarren 6/10/2024 6/10/2024 2024-Ohio-2211
State v. Willis CA2023-07-060Defendant appeals convictions for aggravated robbery. Defendant claimed that the state failed to prove his identity in an armed home invasion where three home invaders wore masks. Defendant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and the greater weight of the evidence. The circumstantial evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated the defendant's identity as one of the home invaders.ByrneWarren 6/10/2024 6/10/2024 2024-Ohio-2210
In re K.H. CA2024-02-002The juvenile court did not err in granting permanent custody of child to the Department of Job and Family Services. The decision was in the best interest of the child because Mother had not remedied the conditions that led to child's removal, including mental health concerns, lack of housing, and potentially substance abuse. The child was placed in a loving foster home that had interest in adoption. In addition, the child could not be placed with Mother within a reasonable time due to Mother's ongoing issues and unwillingness to participate in recommended, cost-free programs. Mother's arguments amounted to a plea for an indefinite period to regain custody because nothing in the record showed she would ever take advantage of the resources being offered to her.ByrnePreble 6/3/2024 6/3/2024 2024-Ohio-2113
State v. Frazier CA2023-11-097The trial court did not err by accepting appellant's Alford plea to one count of first-degree felony aggravated robbery with an attached three-year firearm specification where appellant's decision to enter such a plea was supported by a factual basis and rationale choice given the evidence that the state would have attempted to introduce against appellant at a trial, thus rendering appellant's plea knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made despite the trial court never inquiring into the reason why appellant was entering an Alford plea rather than a standard guilty plea.S. PowellWarren 6/3/2024 6/3/2024 2024-Ohio-2114
Schooler v. Combs CA2023-08-061Defendant appeals denial of motion for relief from default judgment. Defendant failed to appeal from the default judgment. Defendant also failed to appeal denial of Civ.R. 60(B) motion. Defendant's motion on appeal was barred by res judicata.ByrneClermont 6/3/2024 6/3/2024 2024-Ohio-2111
A.W. v. Kircher CA2023-11-108Municipal court erred in dismissing a plaintiff's defamation claim pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6) and in granting summary judgment to plaintiff's former attorney on plaintiff's R.C. 2307.60 claim.M. PowellWarren 6/3/2024 6/3/2024 2024-Ohio-2115
State v. Thompson CA2023-03-003Appellant's convictions for intimidation, OVI with a firearm specification, and having weapons under disability were supported by sufficient evidence and the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court did not err in finding appellant competent to stand trial, by not merging appellant's offenses, or by imposing consecutive sentences. Appellant's "sovereign citizen" arguments have no basis in law and are rejected as meritless.PiperMadison 6/3/2024 6/3/2024 2024-Ohio-2112
State v. Pennington CA2023-11-020 & CA2023-11-021The trial court did not err by accepting appellant's guilty pleas to one count of third-degree felony failure to comply with order or signal of police officer and one count of fourth-degree felony operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol upon finding appellant's guilty pleas were knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered despite appellant's claim that a determination on appellant's psychiatric evaluation was left outstanding as such a claim was waived by appellant pleading guilty. The trial court also did not err by denying either of appellant's presentence motions to withdraw his guilty pleas where appellant failed to provide a reasonable or legitimate basis for the withdrawal of his guilty pleas.S. PowellClinton 5/28/2024 5/28/2024 2024-Ohio-2020
Corcoran v. Bostic CA2023-08-053Trial court did not err by finding appellant did not have a garageman's lien on a vehicle. The matter was controlled by the language of the written contract. In addition, R.C. 4505.04 applies only to litigation where there are rival claimants to title. Since appellant was not a rival claimant, R.C. 4505.04 was inapplicable to the facts in this case.PiperClermont 5/28/2024 5/28/2024 2024-Ohio-2019
State v. Babb CA2023-10-113The trial court did not commit any error, plain or otherwise, by failing to aggregate and "merge" at sentencing appellant's conviction for grand theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(2) and misuse of credit cards in violation of R.C. 2913.21(B)(2) where appellant's conduct in committing those offenses was separate and distinct. The trial court also did not commit an error requiring appellant's 18-month prison sentence to be reversed and a new sentencing hearing be had due to the trial court's failure to adhere to the requirements set forth in R.C. 2947.06(B) at sentencing as it relates to the forensic mitigation report generated in this case.S. PowellButler 5/28/2024 5/28/2024 2024-Ohio-2018
State v. Keltner CA2023-09-097The record does not show that appellant expressly pled guilty to the charged offense and, therefore, there was no basis for a conviction.PiperButler 5/28/2024 5/28/2024 2024-Ohio-2017
State v. Chisenhall CA2023-08-058Appellant's conviction for 25 felony offenses, including 19 counts of third-degree felony unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, was affirmed over appellant's claims that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a mistrial and motion to dismiss based on speedy trial grounds, as well as appellant's claims that the trial court erred by admitting allegedly hearsay statements into evidence, that the prosecutor engaged in prosecutorial misconduct, and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel where appellant's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence given the victims' testimony and supporting evidence presented by the state at trial.S. PowellClermont 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 2024-Ohio-1918
Williamson v. Williamson CA2023-05-058Divorcee appeals from decision finding residential home marital property. Divorcee argued that the home was purchased entirely with separate property. Competent and credible evidence supported the court's determination that the divorcee failed to trace her separate property. Disclaimer provision in trust executed in 1997 violated R.C. 3103.06, which prohibited spouses from entering into postnuptial agreements during the marriage.ByrneButler 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 2024-Ohio-1919
State v. Burnett CA2023-06-010Anders no error.Per CuriamMadison 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 2024-Ohio-1915
State v. Cullen CA2022-08-016A defendant appeals from decision finding him competent to stand trial and denying motion for professional competency evaluation. Reliable, credible evidence supported the trial court's conclusion that defendant was competent to stand trial. Evidence presented at competency hearing demonstrated that court did not abuse its discretion in failing to order professional competency evaluation. WITH DISSENTING OPINION.ByrneMadison 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 2024-Ohio-1916