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 138 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Brandon 2020-CA-41The trial court did not err by overruling appellant’s motion to correct jail-time credit. The record does not show that appellant was entitled to additional credit. Judgment affirmed.HallClark 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1328
Cline v. Tecumseh Local Bd. of Edn. 2020-CA-36The trial court did not err in granting appellees’ motions to dismiss. The appellees were immune from civil liability under the Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act, and the appellants’ complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Judgment affirmed.EpleyClark 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1329
State v. Murray 2020-CA-58After a full hearing on appellant’s pre-sentence motion to withdraw her guilty plea to one count of operating a vehicle while under the influence, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion. Appellant failed to establish a reasonable and legitimate basis for the withdrawal of her plea beyond the conclusory statements in her motion regarding the alleged effect of pre-existing medical conditions. Judgment affirmed.DonovanClark 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1335
State v. Beall 28335The jury’s findings that appellant was guilty of attempted murder and that he threatened the use of force during the commission of three robberies were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. Even if the trial court’s decision overruling appellant’s motion to sever two robbery counts from the other counts in the indictment were erroneous, such error was harmless because these counts were tried separately to the court at appellant’s request. The trial court did not err by allowing the admission of other-acts evidence. Finally, the trial court did not violate appellant’s Sixth Amendment right to present witnesses by addressing potential Fifth Amendment self-incrimination issues with a defense witness who, after this discussion, asserted her right against self-incrimination. Judgment affirmed.TuckerMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1326
State v. Bell 28909Appellant entered guilty pleas to three offenses and was sentenced to concurrent terms. Counsel filed an Anders brief. Upon review, we find no arguably meritorious assignments of error. Judgment affirmed.DonovanMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1327
State v. Derrick 28878The trial court did not err by imposing consecutive prison sentences. Although appellant argued that the trial court’s decision to impose consecutive sentences contradicted the overriding purposes and principles of felony sentencing in R.C. 2929.11, it is well established that consecutive sentences must be reviewed for compliance with R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), not R.C. 2929.11. The record in this case establishes that the trial court complied with R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) when imposing consecutive sentences. The trial court made all the required consecutive-sentence findings at the sentencing hearing and incorporated those findings into the sentencing entry. The trial court’s consecutive-sentence findings also were not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record. Judgment affirmed.WelbaumMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1330
Disher v. Bannick 28903The common pleas court erred in dismissing appellant’s quiet title claim. Although the municipal court entered a prior judgment in a forcible entry and detainer action involving the same parties and property, the municipal court lacked jurisdiction to hear a quiet title claim, and therefore that claim was not barred by res judicata. Judgment reversed and remanded as to quiet title, and affirmed in all other respects.EpleyMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1331
In re R.S.J. 28825The juvenile court did not err in granting permanent custody to appellee, a children services agency. As a preliminary matter, appellant failed to file specific objections to the magistrate’s decision, so review is for plain error only. The juvenile court did not commit plain error or any error in rejecting the motion for custody filed by appellant, who was the child’s paternal great-grandmother. The court was not statutorily required to consider appellant as a potential placement, and ample evidence supported the court’s finding that a grant of permanent custody to the agency was in the child’s best interest. Judgment affirmed.WelbaumMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1332
State v. Johnson 28905The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it overruled appellant’s motion for relief from judgment and to correct jail-time credit and his motion to withdraw his guilty plea without conducting a hearing. Appellant’s delay of approximately 20 years between the time of his sentencing and the filing of the motion to withdraw his guilty plea was unreasonable under the circumstances. Additionally, appellant’s self-serving statements in his affidavit attached to the motion to withdraw, which alleged sexual misconduct on the part of his former counsel with appellant’s then-fiancée, standing alone, were insufficient to demonstrate a manifest injustice or to support the withdrawal of his guilty plea. Judgment affirmed.DonovanMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1333
State v. Leet 28870The trial court erred when it overruled appellant’s motion for return of a firearm. The trial court’s order to forfeit and destroy the firearm was not lawful under any section of R.C. 2981 or R.C. 2923.13(A)(5). Judgment reversed and remanded.DonovanMontgomery 4/16/2021 4/16/2021 2021-Ohio-1334