Opinion Search

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:

Source:

Year Decided From:

Year Decided To:

Year Decided Range Warning:

The selected 'Year Decided To:' is less than the selected 'Year Decided From:'.  Please select a 'To:' year newer than or equal to the 'From:' year.

County:

Case Number:

Author:

Topics and Issues:

WebCite No:

-Ohio-

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.

Hide Topics and Issues column This search returned 280 rows. Rows per page:

State v. Popham

2025 CA 00087

Though the trial court did not tell the defendant that she could, in accordance with the first sentence of Criminal Rule 32.3(B), retain her own attorney to assist her at a community-control revocation hearing, no harm flowed from that oversight where the defendant was told by a magistrate that she had a right to counsel and that an attorney could be appointed for her if she could not afford one, and where the defendant applied for and received a public defender, who in turn represented her at the final revocation hearing.

Gormley

Licking

6/18/2026

2026-Ohio-2350

State v. Riley

CT2025-0136

Manifest weight; Sentencing

King

Muskingum

6/18/2026

2026-Ohio-2351

State v. Woods

2025CA00022

The trial court properly denied, without holding a hearing, a criminal defendant's request for permission to file a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence where the affidavit filed by the defendant in support of his request did not contain the necessary clear and convincing evidence that the defendant had been, in the words of Criminal Rule 33(B), "unavoidably prevented" from discovering the new evidence within the 120-day time limit set by the rule.

Gormley

Stark

6/17/2026

6/18/2026

2026-Ohio-2352

State v. Biggs

2025CA00103, 2025CA00104

Crim.R. 33(B); Petition for postconviction relief

Baldwin

Stark

6/17/2026

2026-Ohio-2298

State v. Hammonds

25CA0049, 25CA0050, 25CA0051

When a criminal defendant challenging his or her sentence in an appeal did not object to the sentence in the trial court after being given an opportunity to do so, the sentence is reviewed solely for plain error. And a felony sentence is not contrary to law if it was within the statutory range for the crime and if the trial court considered the overriding purposes of sentencing in R.C. 2929.11 and the seriousness and recidivism factors in R.C. 2929.12.

Gormley

Guernsey

6/17/2026

2026-Ohio-2295

...