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 83 rows. Rows per page: 
123456789
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Fuell CA2020-02-008Juvenile offender charged with murder appeals juvenile court decision transferring him to the adult division. Offender pled guilty and appeals sentence, arguing court violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to consider the mitigating effect of youth before imposing sentence. Court did not err in granting mandatory transfer. Offender claimed certain evidence admitted in violation of Confrontation Clause rights and Rules of Evidence. Transfer hearing was preliminary and non-adjudicatory; Confrontation Clause inapplicable. Unclear whether Rules of Evidence apply at transfer hearing. However, even if some evidence improperly admitted, any error harmless. Substantial other evidence, exclusive of challenged evidence, established probable cause. Offender argued that pursuant to State v. Patrick, sentencing court required to separately consider his youth as mitigating factor before imposing life sentence with possibility of parole. Offender failed to raise the argument at sentencing and limited to a review for plain error. Patrick involved different sentencing provision; it was not "plain" that Patrick applied and that the court erred.ByrneClermont 5/10/2021 5/10/2021 2021-Ohio-1627
State v. Paul CA2020-08-010While the trial court properly sentenced appellant to consecutive sentences and its findings were supported by the record, the trial court failed to give appellant the necessary notifications regarding the indefinite nature of his sentence. PiperClinton 5/10/2021 5/10/2021 2021-Ohio-1628
State v. Johnson CA2020-06-008The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to correct his jail-time credit calculation where the defendant failed to demonstrate the issue was not raised during sentencing and his successive motion was barred by res judicata. ByrneFayette 5/10/2021 5/10/2021 2021-Ohio-1629
In re L.M. CA2020-12-017; CA2020-12-018The juvenile court did not err by denying appellant's two motions to intervene in the proceedings involving her two grandchildren that were initiated by appellee, a children services agency, after the children were removed from the care of their mother and father and placed in appellee's temporary custody where appellant could not intervene of right under Civ.R. 24(A) and had not stood in loco parentis with her two grandchildren so as to allow for permissive intervention under Civ.R. 24(B).S. PowellPreble 5/10/2021 5/10/2021 2021-Ohio-1630
State v. Martin-Paley CA2020-05-032There was sufficient evidence to convict appellant of the OVI offense and the conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The evidence proved that appellant had used drugs of abuse, was impaired, and there was a link between the drugs and the impairment.M. PowellWarren 5/10/2021 5/10/2021 2021-Ohio-1631
In re K.D. CA2020-11-063The juvenile court erred by issuing a dispositional decision placing appellee, an unruly child, into the temporary custody of appellant, a children services agency, without first giving the agency notice of the juvenile court's intended dispositional order as required by R.C. 2151.3510.S. PowellClermont 5/3/2021 5/3/2021 2021-Ohio-1538
State v. Amison CA2020-08-093Defendant appeals murder conviction. Juror reported vehicle vandalized and concerns that it may have been related to jury service. Counsel did not provide ineffective assistance for failing to strike the juror. Juror stated he was nervous but was "okay" after speaking with a detective. Juror affirmed he could decide the case impartially. Defense counsel indicated he was satisfied that juror could perform duties and had a strategic purpose for retaining juror. Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request to instruct jury on voluntary manslaughter. No evidence that victim ever provoked defendant. In each encounter between defendant and victim, the defendant was aggressor.M. PowellButler 5/3/2021 5/3/2021 2021-Ohio-1537
State v. Murrill CA2020-08-081Trial court did not err in denying petition for postconviction relief where defendant failed to establish that the trial judge who sentenced him was biased or prejudiced against him or other defendants who committed similar crimes.M. PowellButler 4/26/2021 4/26/2021 2021-Ohio-1449
Polanco v. Polanco CA2020-09-096The domestic relations court erred in dismissing father's motion to register a New York child support order and his motion to modify or terminate the order based on a lack of jurisdiction, as the court had jurisdiction pursuant to R.C. 3115.611(A)(1) since neither the children, father, nor mother resided in New York, father was a resident of Florida, and mother resided in Butler County, Ohio. Further, the New York child-support order is subject to modification or termination in the event that one or more of the children reach 21 years of age or otherwise become economically independent, as contemplated by New York law. HendricksonButler 4/26/2021 4/26/2021 2021-Ohio-1450
State v. Folino CA202-12-132Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 4/26/2021 4/26/2021 2021-Ohio-1451
123456789