|
|
State v. McCargo
| 115704 | Presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea; pro se litigant; Crim.R. 32.1; ineffective assistance of counsel; coerced plea; trial strategy; knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered a guilty plea. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant-appellant’s presentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The defendant-appellant did not submit evidence to rebut the record and show that but for his defense counsel’s actions he would not have entered his guilty plea. The record demonstrates defendant-appellant entered a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary plea. | Clary | Cuyahoga |
8/13/2026
|
8/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3115 |
|
State v. Ward
| 115488 | Conspiracy to commit aggravated murder; indictment; sufficiency of the evidence; jury instructions; plain error; admissibility of opinion testimony; cumulative error. Defendant’s conviction for conspiracy to commit aggravated murder affirmed. The indictment for conspiracy sufficiently alleged a substantial overt act. The State presented sufficient circumstantial evidence of a substantial overt act and agreement to commit murder when evidence showed that the defendant allowed unknown persons to use his rental car in this drive-by shooting. The court’s jury instruction regarding conspiracy properly recited the State’s burden of proof at trial and did not usurp the jury’s role as factfinder. Although a police officer’s opinion testimony about the defendant’s guilt is inadmissible at trial, the defendant failed to identify any opinion testimony by the police officer and we found no such testimony in the trial transcript. Having found no trial error, we also find no cumulative error. | E.A. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
8/13/2026
|
8/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3113 |
|
Higgins v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth.
| 116251 | R.C. Ch. 2744; political subdivision immunity; Civ.R. 12(B)(6); motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; negligent operation of bus; reckless conduct by bus driver. The trial court erred by dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint for injuries she allegedly suffered when the bus driver closed the bus door on her leg. The defendant’s Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion asked the court to dismiss one claim in the plaintiff’s complaint. The court improperly granted this motion and improperly sua sponte dismissed the second claim in the complaint also, resulting in the entire case being erroneously dismissed. The plaintiff’s allegations clearly survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. | E.A. Gallagher | Cuyahoga |
8/13/2026
|
8/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3120 |
|
Cedeno v. Wilson
| 115931 | Summary judgment; motion for extension of time; not docketed; limited record. Appeal dismissed. The issues raised in this appeal deal solely with the trial court’s alleged denial of the appellant’s second motion for an extension of time. However, the appellant’s second motion for extension of time was not on the trial court’s docket at the time it issued its final judgment and, thus, it cannot be deemed as denied. Because the issues raised in this appeal deal solely with the alleged denial of the second motion for extension of time, there are no issues for this court to review and the appeal is dismissed. | Ryan | Cuyahoga |
8/13/2026
|
8/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3117 |
|
Dozier v. Indian Hills Healthcare Group, Inc.
| 115923 | Nursing home; negligence; motion in limine; directed verdict. Judgment affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting the defense’s motion in limine to exclude federal and state regulations regarding nursing home care. The trial court did not err by granting the defense’s motion for a directed verdict because the plaintiff failed to establish that the nursing home’s breach of a duty proximately caused the patient’s injury. | Ryan | Cuyahoga |
8/13/2026
|
8/13/2026
| 2026-Ohio-3116 |
|