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 55 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Cunningham L-16-1248; L-16-1249Appellant's motion to withdraw his Alford plea was properly denied where appellant was informed of the potential prison sentence he was facing as a consequence of the plea and affirmed that he had not been promised anything other than what was contained in the plea agreement. Appellant's conviction for complicity to commit felonious assault was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where he unlocked an entrance door at a bar, thereby granting entry to his friend who had been removed, resulting in a shooting that injured two individuals.JensenLucas 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-663
Harris-Miles v. Lakewood Hosp. E-17-023In medical malpractice case, summary judgment in favor of surgeon and hospital was appropriate where patient's only expert failed to testify that the alleged negligence proximately caused her injuries.MayleErie 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-664
State v. Jeko L-17-1143Trial court abused its discretion in granting a motion for new trial based on newly-discovered evidence.PietrykowskiLucas 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-665
LublinSussman Group, L.L.P. v. Lee L-17-1077Cross-motions for summary judgment. Breach of contract claims. Wrongful termination claim. Ambiguous contract language.SingerLucas 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-666
Toledo v. Whitfield L-17-1083Municipal court's complete failure to comply with Crim.R. 11(E) requires that appellee's plea of no contest be vacated.SingerLucas 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-667
State v. Wright L-16-1164Trial court did not err in imposing sentences for discharge of a firearm upon or over a public road or highway and an attendant firearm specification because the specification does not merge with the principal offense as it is a penalty enhancement and not a separate offense. Trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds, where appellant was brought to trial within 90 days of his arrest, after taking into account time periods that were tolled under R.C. 2945.72.JensenLucas 2/23/2018 2/23/2018 2018-Ohio-668
State v. Bracey S-16-025Anders brief. Guilty plea was entered into knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. Sentence imposed was within confines of law and amply supported by the record, and the trial court considered the relevant sentencing criteria. SingerSandusky 2/16/2018 2/16/2018 2018-Ohio-618
State v. Hall L-17-1069Appellant forfeited all but plain error by failing to argue in trial court that his convictions were for allied offenses of similar import. On appeal he failed to demonstrate reasonable probability that his convictions were for allied offenses and, therefore, cannot show that trial court committed plain error by failing to inquire into merger.MayleLucas 2/16/2018 2/16/2018 2018-Ohio-619
State v. Highsmith L-16-1183The trial court complied with all applicable sentencing statutes and appellant's sentence is not contrary to law.MayleLucas 2/16/2018 2/16/2018 2018-Ohio-620
State v. Martin S-17-021This is a brief submitted pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). After a thorough and independent examination of the record, the court is unable to find an issue of arguable merit and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. OsowikSandusky 2/16/2018 2/16/2018 2018-Ohio-621