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.?
Citation:
   What is Citation?
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.
This search returned 244 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678910...>>
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Anderson 2025-CA-32Appellant’s plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. In sentencing appellant, the trial court properly considered the risk his crimes posed to inmates, as appellant’s convictions arose from his illegal conveyance of fentanyl into a jail. Appellant’s sentence is not contrary to law. Judgment affirmed.HuffmanChampaign 8/28/2026 8/28/2026 2026-Ohio-3358
State v. Seelig 2025-CA-35Appellant appeals from two judgments: (1) his conviction on misdemeanor domestic violence and (2) the imposition of a prison sentence upon the revocation of his community control. Appellant’s misdemeanor conviction is summarily affirmed due to his failure to raise an assignment of error related to that judgment. His appeal regarding his prison sentence is moot because he has completely served the sentence and he has not been placed on postrelease control. Appeal in misdemeanor case affirmed. Appeal in felony case dismissed.EpleyChampaign 8/28/2026 8/28/2026 2026-Ohio-3364
State v. Trent 2025-CA-85Appellant failed to establish that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by filing a motion to continue his trial, failing to adequately consult with appellant about his plea, or failing to file a motion to suppress. The trial court did not err in not acting on appellant’s post-sentence motion to withdraw guilty plea. Appellant appealed only 12 days after he filed the motion—well within the timeframe for the court to rule on it—and the appeal divested the trial court of jurisdiction over the motion. Judgment affirmed.HansemanClark 8/28/2026 8/28/2026 2026-Ohio-3366
Holcomb v. Hall 2026-CA-7The trial court erred in dismissing appellant’s claim for monetary damages due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Appellant’s complaint sought less than $15,000 in damages, appellant presented evidence in support of less than $15,000 in damages, and the magistrate recommended an award of less than $15,000. Judgment reversed and remanded.LewisGreene 8/28/2026 8/28/2026 2026-Ohio-3361
State v. Dennis 30653The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the appellant’s request for public records related to his criminal conviction. Appellant is currently incarcerated on his conviction and failed to identify a justiciable claim to which the requested records are relevant, as required by R.C. 149.43. Judgment affirmed. (Huffman, J., concurring in judgment only.)EpleyMontgomery 8/28/2026 8/28/2026 2026-Ohio-3359
12345678910...>>