|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Egan v. Egan
| CA2024-08-102 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it modified the magistrate's decision and ordered a smaller reduction in Husband's spousal support obligation because Husband failed to meet his burden of proof that he did not voluntarily reduce his income. There was no evidence in the record to support a partial credit toward the attorney fees Husband was ordered to pay. | Hendrickson | Butler |
4/28/2025
|
4/28/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1493 |
|
State v. Schaffer
| CA2024-06-041 | Appellant's conviction for illegal conveyance of drugs into a detention facility was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the jury disbelieved appellant's testimony and believed the testimony offered by the state indicating appellant knew the packages being conveyed into the detention facility contained drugs. However, because of an issue that occurred at appellant's sentencing hearing with respect to the trial court making the requisite consecutive sentence findings, appellant was entitled to resentencing and the matter was reversed and remanded for that limited purpose. | Piper | Warren |
4/28/2025
|
4/28/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1494 |
|
State v. Alexander
| CA2025-01-001 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
4/21/2025
|
4/21/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1402 |
|
State v. Griffin
| CA2024-04-029 | The trial court did not err by permitting Evid.R. 404(B) other-acts evidence where the identity of the perpetrator was at issue and the other-acts evidence was permissible modus operandi evidence. Appellant's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence. The jury could reasonably infer that appellant was the individual responsible without engaging in impermissible inference stacking. The trial court did not infringe on appellant's constitutional rights when it informed him that he was subject to cross-examination if he voluntarily took the stand in his own defense. | Powell | Clermont |
4/21/2025
|
4/21/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1403 |
|
Schaible v. Schaible
| CA2024-10-073 | The domestic relations court did not err by finding appellant in contempt, for denying appellant’s motion to change venue, or for determining it was in her child’s best interest to limit appellant’s parenting time with the child where none of the domestic | Piper | Clermont |
4/21/2025
|
4/21/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1404 |
|
State v. Ward
| CA2024-10-076 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Clermont |
4/21/2025
|
4/21/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1405 |
|
In re J.M.
| CA2025-01-008 | The juvenile court's decision to grant permanent custody of the minor child to a children services agency was in the child's best interest and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where Father failed to visit or maintain contact with the child for more than 90 days, failed to maintain sobriety, failed to complete case plan objectives, and failed to demonstrate a commitment to financially supporting the child. | Hendrickson | Clermont |
4/21/2025
|
4/21/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1406 |
|
Williams v. Williams
| CA2024-06-051 | Trial court erred in assigning husband any outstanding liability to a third person in its property division where trial court failed to address the third party's advances to the parties during the parties' marriage, much less classify the advances as a marital or separate debt or a gift, and where trial court failed to make the required R.C. 3105.171(G) written findings of fact. | Powell | Clermont |
4/14/2025
|
4/14/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1319 |
|
State v. Palma
| CA2024-08-101 & CA2024-08-108 | Appellant's conviction for failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer and obstructing official business were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence and no plain error occurred with respect to the verdict form for appellant's conviction of failing to comply with an order or signal of a police officer where appellant failed to prove any defect in the verdict form affected the outcome of his trial. | Piper | Butler |
4/14/2025
|
4/14/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1318 |
|
State v. Chambers
| CA2024-06-034 | Trial court abused its discretion by imposing five-year no-contact order between father and his minor children as condition of community control following domestic violence conviction against children's mother. No-contact order was not an appropriate community-control condition as it lacked rehabilitative focus and was overly broad. | Byrne | Warren |
4/14/2025
|
4/14/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1320 |
|
U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Chibinda
| CA2024-07-094 | The trial court did not err by denying the Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment where the appellants failed to point to a meritorious defense or claim they could present if relief were granted and there were no grounds for relief as set forth in Civ.R. 60(B)(1)-(5). | Byrne | Butler |
4/7/2025
|
4/7/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1212 |
|
State v. Spain
| CA2023-11-123 | Juvenile defendant appeals from his manslaughter conviction. Defendant argued that the court erred by failing to expressly consider R.C. 2929.19(B)(1)(b), the youth-mitigation factors, at sentencing. Sentencing record supported conclusion that trial court considered defendant's youth before imposing sentence. | Byrne | Butler |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1121 |
|
State v. Marcum
| CA2024-05-072 | Appellant's conviction for obstructing official business was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the state demonstrated appellant obstructed and delayed officers in their duty to fully investigate a 9-1-1 hang-up call made by his wife. | Hendrickson | Butler |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1122 |
|
State v. McQueen
| CA2024-07-087 | Appellant's convictions for abduction and strangulation were not allied offenses of similar import as the offenses were committed with separate conduct and the harms that resulted from the two offenses were separate and identifiable. | Hendrickson | Butler |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1123 |
|
State v. Sweet
| CA2024-10-074 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Clermont |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1126 |
|
State v. Wu
| CA2024-05-027 | Appellant's plea was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered where the totality of the circumstances indicated appellant understood the nature of the charges and the bill of particulars, which served as the state's recitation of facts, provided a sufficient basis to satisfy the elements of the offenses and to establish venue in Warren County. As enrollment in the violent offender database, R.C. 2903.41 et seq., is a collateral consequence rather than a punishment, Crim.R. 11 does not require a trial court to inform a defendant of the registration and notification requirements before accepting the defendant's guilty plea. Appellant's convictions for aggravated burglary, kidnapping, felonious assault, and retaliation were not allied offenses of similar import. Notice of postrelease control provided at the plea hearing and set forth in the sentencing entry does not correct the trial court's failure to impose postrelease control at the sentencing hearing. | Hendrickson | Warren |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1138 |
|
State v. Hanson
| CA2024-07-049 | Appellant failed to file a transcript of the proceedings necessary for this appeal. When portions of the transcript necessary for resolving assigned errors are omitted from the record, the reviewing court has nothing to evaluate and must presume the regularity or validity of the lower court's proceedings and affirm. | Hendrickson | Warren |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1139 |
|
Kochaliyev v. Kochaliyeva
| CA2024-08-055 | Divorce decree affirmed. There was no plain error by the trial court where its consideration of affidavits submitted by husband and wife was agreed to by husband's counsel. There was also no error in determining husband's separate interest in the marital home's equity because husband did not sufficiently tie purported loans to the marital home. | Hendrickson | Warren |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1140 |
|
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Dickerson
| CA2024-10-068 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that debtor was liable for the balance of a credit card account opened in her name where the court did not find credible the debtor's testimony that the account was fraudulently opened and used without her knowledge or authorization. | Powell | Warren |
3/31/2025
|
3/31/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1141 |
|
Otterbeing Maineville, L.L.C. v. Carman
| CA2024-07-052 | Trial court did not err in entering final judgment where plaintiff's attempt to dismiss only remaining claims under Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a), while preserving prior summary judgment rulings, was a legal nullity. Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to nursing home where son's personal liability arose from breach of contractual duty to manage mother's resources rather than from prohibited third-party payment guarantee under Federal Nursing Home Reform Act. Trial court did not err in calculating damages based on diverted funds rather than Medicaid rates where nursing home was entitled to private-pay rates before resident established Medicaid eligibility. Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment on Consumer Sales Practices Act counterclaim where nursing home's contract enforcement and debt collection practices had colorable legal basis and did not constitute deceptive or unconscionable conduct. | M. Powell | Warren |
3/24/2025
|
3/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1013 |
|
State v. Lopez
| CA2024-10-072 | Trial court did not err in denying defendant's request for new counsel where defendant later withdrew his request and entered a valid guilty plea. | Siebert | Clermont |
3/24/2025
|
3/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1011 |
|
State v. Rucker
| CA2024-11-027 | The trial court did not err in accepting appellant's guilty plea where the record reflects the court complied with Crim. R. 11 and his plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent in all respects. | Siebert | Fayette |
3/24/2025
|
3/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1012 |
|
Evans v. Evans
| CA2024-07-097 | The trial court erred in awarding spousal support to appellee where appellee had specifically withdrawn his request for spousal support and appellant relied upon that withdrawal in the presentation of his case. | Siebert | Butler |
3/24/2025
|
3/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-1010 |
|
State v. Faircloth
| CA2024-02-028 | Appellant's conviction for theft by deception in violation of R.C. 2913.02(A)(3) was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. However, because the trial court did not afford appellant her right to allocution at sentencing, the trial court's judgment was reversed and remanded for the limited purpose of resentencing to afford appellant her right to allocution as provided by Crim.R. 32(A)(1). WITH DISSENTING OPINION. | Piper | Butler |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-878 |
|
State v. Stewart
| CA2024-03-045 | By stipulating to the admission of a cell phone download, which included text messages recovered from the phone, and by failing to object to any of the individual text messages offered by the state into evidence, appellant waived his right to challenge the admissibility of the evidence. Appellant's weapons and drug-related convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. WITH CONCURRING OPINION. | Hendrickson | Butler |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-879 |
|
Richter v. Richter
| CA2024-08-105 | Trial court did not abuse its discretion in confirming a commissioners' report and finding that land owned by appellant and appellee could not be partitioned, because doing so would cause manifest injury to its value where the resulting parcels would not comply with local zoning requirements. The trial court provided adequate notice that zoning variance issues would be considered at the final evidentiary hearing, the commissioners' report was supported by competent credible evidence, and the court was under no obligation to provide appellant additional time to seek a zoning variance that was unlikely to be granted. | Siebert | Butler |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-880 |
|
State v. Shrophshire
| CA2024-02-012; CA2024-02-013 | The trial court erred in accepting appellant's no contest plea where the trial court failed to advise appellant during the plea colloquy that by entering his no contest plea, he was waiving his right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses. As the trial court failed to explain a constitutional right set forth in Crim.R. 11(C)(2)(c), we presume the plea was entered involuntarily and unknowingly and appellant did not need to show prejudice to have his plea vacated. WITH DISSENTING OPINION. | Hendrickson | Clermont |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-881 |
|
Johnson v. First Key Homes, L.L.C.
| CA2024-09-067 | Release of escrowed rent to tenant affirmed. Landlord waived notice of rent escrow proceedings because it did not provide tenant with an Ohio address as required by R.C. 5321.18. Tenant's testimony that mold at rental home was not addressed by landlord was uncontroverted and merited release of the escrowed rent to her. | Siebert | Clermont |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-882 |
|
State v. Watson
| CA2024-09-026 | Defendant's conviction for having a weapon while under disability was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. | Powell | Fayette |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-883 |
|
In re T.T.
| CA2024-10-067 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Warren |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-885 |
|
In re J.D.L.
| CA2024-08-012 | Although it was unclear whether Preble County was the proper venue, the Preble County Juvenile Court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the dependency cases of the appellant's children. | Powell | Preble |
3/17/2025
|
3/17/2025
| 2025-Ohio-884 |
|
Garrett v. Kronk
| CA2024-05-010 | The juvenile court's decision naming Father the residential parent and legal custodian of the parties' minor child was supported by the manifest weight of the evidence and was not an abuse of discretion where there was ample evidence in the record to support that such a designation was in the best interest of the child. | M. Powell | Madison |
3/10/2025
|
3/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-783 |
|
State v. Montgomery
| CA2024-01-002 | Defendant's convictions for, among other charges, aggravated murder and aggravated robbery are affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a self-defense instruction where no evidence supported defendant's assertion he believed marijuana would be purchased (as opposed to taken) from the victim. Even if his testimony were believed, defendant unreasonably escalated a dispute over the theft of the victim's marijuana by drawing a gun and shooting the victim. Testimony and evidence regarding other activity done by defendant and his associates throughout the day was not propensity evidence but instead context that demonstrated intent, preparation, planning, and opportunity to rob the victim. Finally, defendant's convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the jury believed the testimony and evidence presented by the state. Defendant's testimony of his actions following the incident demonstrated consciousness of guilt. | Hendrickson | Clermont |
3/10/2025
|
3/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-784 |
|
State v. Isreal
| CA2024-10-119 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
3/10/2025
|
3/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-785 |
|
State v. Vickers
| CA2024-08-107 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
3/10/2025
|
3/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-786 |
|
State v. Robinson
| CA2024-08-111 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Butler |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-695 |
|
State v. Rollins
| CA2024-06-053 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Clermont |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-696 |
|
State v. Hudson
| CA2024-08-013 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Clinton |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-697 |
|
State v. Harner
| CA2023-11-017 | Defendant appeals from conviction for aggravated murder following a plea negotiation and a jointly-recommended sentence. Defendant's plea was made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily notwithstanding fact that trial court did not inform defendant that he could not appeal a jointly-recommended sentence pursuant to R.C. 2953.08(D)(1). Crim.R. 11(C) does not require court to advise defendant of effect of jointly-recommended sentence. | Byrne | Madison |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-698 |
|
State v. Bussell
| CA2024-06-040 | Appellant's conviction for gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(4) was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, and the trial court did not err by providing the jury with a course of conduct instruction or in sentencing appellant to prison, where it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant had engaged in sexual contact with the child victim by touching her leg and upper thigh for the purposes of his own sexual gratification. Appellant's sentence was nevertheless reversed for the trial court to employ the postrelease control correction procedures set forth in R.C. 2929.191. | Piper | Warren |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-699 |
|
In re M.P.A.S.
| CA2024-10-066 | Juvenile's delinquency adjudication for receiving stolen property was not supported by sufficient evidence as the state failed to show the juvenile knew or had reasonable cause to believe the vehicle was stolen. | Powell | Warren |
3/3/2025
|
3/3/2025
| 2025-Ohio-700 |
|
Lawless v. Henderson
| CA2024-07-018 | Issuance of civil protection order ("CPO") affirmed. Respondent was constructively served CPO petition and ex parte CPO at the time he attempted to deliberately avoid personal service of process from sheriff. The trial court therefore had jurisdiction to issue a full CPO after conducting a hearing the respondent did not attend. Further, respondent's judicial admission that he called to the court to advise he would be late to the hearing demonstrated he had notice of the hearing. | Powell | Fayette |
2/24/2025
|
2/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-588 |
|
Myers v. First Energy
| CA2024-08-016 | The trial court did not err in dismissing appellant’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because disputes over electrical service rates and charges fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio ("PUCO") and merely casting allegations as a breach of contract does not confer jurisdiction on the trial court. Appellant’s arguments regarding the magistrate’s bias were waived, and arguments regarding the trial judge’s bias were not a proper subject for appellate review. Appellant’s eighth amendment claims regarding entirely separate proceedings were not properly before the appellate court and were therefore disregarded. | Hendrickson | Madison |
2/24/2025
|
2/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-589 |
|
State v. Perez-Echeniquez
| CA2024-12-025 | The trial court erred by sentencing appellant to one year in jail, six months more than what was statutorily permissible under R.C. 2929.16(A)(2), thereby rendering the trial court's sentence otherwise contrary to law in violation of R.C. 2953.08(G)(2)(b). | Piper | Madison |
2/24/2025
|
2/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-590 |
|
State v. Tye
| CA2024-02-021 | Appellant's conviction was reversed and vacated where the record did not show that appellant expressly pled guilty to the charged offense and, therefore, there was no basis for the conviction. | Piper | Butler |
2/24/2025
|
2/24/2025
| 2025-Ohio-587 |
|
State v. Burson
| CA2024-08-006 | Appellant was not provided with ineffective assistance of counsel, was not subject to prosecutorial misconduct, and the trial court did not err by denying appellant's motion to suppress, by allowing a certain witness to testify as an expert witness, or in sentencing appellant to prison, where appellant was arrested and charged with two counts of third-degree felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated ("OVI"), both of which included a specification for certain repeat OVI offenders, as well as one count of fourth-degree felony failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer, and one count of second-degree misdemeanor resisting arrest, following a chase that ultimately resulted in appellant being removed from a creek by law enforcement suffering from symptoms of hypothermia that required him to receive medical treatment, which included having his blood drawn and tested for drugs and alcohol. | Piper | Brown |
2/18/2025
|
2/18/2025
| 2025-Ohio-499 |
|
State v. Brown
| CA2024-03-019 | Appellant's convictions for violating a protection order and resisting arrest were supported by the weight of the evidence where appellant was informed about the protection order but refused to leave the residence he was ordered to vacate and then resisted lawful arrest. Appellant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel, nor did the trial court abuse its discretion in rendering its misdemeanor sentencing decision. | M. Powell | Clermont |
2/18/2025
|
2/18/2025
| 2025-Ohio-500 |
|
Gauthier v. Gauthier
| CA2024-05-026 | Trial court erred in finding that a husband's patent costs claim against his former wife was barred by the statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.06. | M. Powell | Warren |
2/18/2025
|
2/18/2025
| 2025-Ohio-501 |
|
State v. Vicars
| CA2024-07-047 | Anders no error. | Per Curiam | Warren |
2/10/2025
|
2/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-412 |
|
State v. Mauch
| CA2024-04-008 | Appellant's guilty plea to one count of first-degree felony aggravated possession of drugs was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered despite the trial court not advising appellant of his truncated appellate rights because the failure to inform a defendant that a guilty plea waives certain rights on appeal is not one of the specifically enumerated rights the trial court is required to discuss during the Crim.R. 11 colloquy. | Piper | Madison |
2/10/2025
|
2/10/2025
| 2025-Ohio-413 |
|