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.? 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 257 rows. Rows per page: 
123456
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Hall L-24-1229Osowik. Trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance for failing to file a motion to suppress. The verdicts were supported by legally sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Aggravated arson does not merge into aggravated murder when the two acts were committed with separate animuses and/or were of dissimilar import.OsowikLucas 11/4/2025 11/4/2025 2025-Ohio-5020
State v. Kohlhoffer L-24-1165Per Mayle, J., appellant’s convictions are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Trial court erred by excluding text messages because they were offered for the nonhearsay purpose of showing their effect on the detective and his investigation. Trial court’s error was harmless because jury would not have reached a different verdict if evidence had been admitted.MayleLucas 11/4/2025 11/4/2025 2025-Ohio-5021
State v. Rosas L-24-1242Per Mayle, J., trial counsel provided effective representation. The trial court’s failure to address appellant directly and personally at sentencing, in violation of Crim.R. 32(A)(1), prejudiced appellant. Appellant failed to show that the trial court’s failure to fully comply with Crim.R. 11(B)(2) and (E) prejudiced her, so she could not show that her plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.MayleLucas 11/4/2025 11/4/2025 2025-Ohio-5022
C.D. v. T.D. L-25-00079Per Mayle, J., in divorce action, wife’s failure to obtain transcript for purposes of objecting to magistrate’s decision restricted appellate review to plain error. No plain error in allocation of parental rights and responsibilities, parenting time, and property division. Inconsistencies in magistrate’s decision regarding amount of attorney’s fees awarded required remand. Remand required to clarify whether magistrate used wrong calculation of duration of marriage in awarding spousal support.MayleLucas 10/31/2025 10/31/2025 2025-Ohio-4976
State v. Ramirez L-24-1228Per Mayle, J., there is no constitutional right to have one’s police interview recorded. Convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. State’s remarks during closing argument did not appeal to jurors’ emotions, State did not improperly vouch for FBI agent’s credibility, and State’s use of personal anecdote was not confusing or prejudicial.MayleLucas 10/31/2025 10/31/2025 2025-Ohio-4977
State v. Whitney L-25-00010 & L-25-00011Sulek - Consecutive sentence findings not clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record where defendant twice breaks into ex-girlfriend’s home and assaults her, then while out on bond from those offenses, chases her down a third time and shoots her new boyfriend. Scrivener’s error in judgment entries imposing postrelease control warrants remand for nunc pro tunc entries reflecting what the trial court actually decided.SulekLucas 10/31/2025 10/31/2025 2025-Ohio-4978
In re K.B. L-25-00127 & L-25-00132Osowik - Trial court correctly granted permanent custody of minor, K.B., to Lucas County Children Services ("LCCS"), pursuant to R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(a) and R.C. 2151.414(E) . Judgment affirmed.OsowikLucas 10/31/2025 10/31/2025 2025-Ohio-4983
Craig v. Craig S-25-013The trial court received direct evidence of appellant’s consent to the settlement agreement through the testimony of his mother acting as his agent through a power-of-attorney that appellant does not contest. Further, the trial court’s decision to approve the settlement agreement, relying on the representation of appellant’s counsel that the power-of-attorney had been completed and would be filed the next day, was not an abuse of discretion.SulekSandusky 10/31/2025 10/31/2025 2025-Ohio-4982
State v. Hoekwatter L-24-1291Judge Duhart, concession of error, trial court improperly imposed a mandatory term of incarceration, post-release control.DuhartLucas 10/28/2025 10/28/2025 2025-Ohio-4928
Connelly v. Connelly L-24-1207Modification of Shared Parenting Agreement; Child Support Deviation, Guardian Ad Litem ("GAL") fees, Attorney Fees. No change of circumstances is required to modify a shared parenting agreement. Trial court erred by deviating from the child support worksheet without determining that such deviation was in the best interest of the child and failing to make findings of fact. Trial court did not err by denying attorney fees or by ordering GAL fees to be split evenly.WillamowskiLucas 10/28/2025 10/28/2025 2025-Ohio-4929
State v. Carr WD-24-088No ineffective assistance where defendant does not demonstrate that defense counsel was objectively unreasonable in not requesting a hearing to investigate a second community control violation for a positive drug test.SulekWood 10/24/2025 10/24/2025 2025-Ohio-4888
State v. Harris F-24-004Per Osowik, J., convictions of child endangering were not against manifest weight of evidence where undisputed evidence timed child’s injuries during period where only defendant and eight-year-old child were present. Sufficient evidence supported involuntary-manslaughter conviction. No plain error in admission of numerous autopsy photos where cause and manner of death were disputed. Trial counsel not ineffective for failing to seek exclusion of cumulative autopsy photosOsowikFulton 10/21/2025 10/22/2025 2025-Ohio-4830
Erie Ins. Co. v. F Street Invests., L.L.C. L-24-1270The trial court’s judgment dismissing mortgagee’s claims under the mortgagor’s insurance policy was not error when it failed to prove damages following a fire at the insured property. Jury demand; damages evidence; extent of the debt.SulekLucas 10/14/2025 10/14/2025 2025-Ohio-4729
In re T.C. L-24-1277Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the trial court’s decision declining to declassify appellant and remove his registration requirements as a tier I juvenile sex offender. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion and did not err by failing to provide reasoning for each of the factors the court was required to consider.ZmudaLucas 10/14/2025 10/14/2025 2025-Ohio-4730
State v. Battle OT-24-047Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, finds that trial court did not abuse its discretion when it imposed sentence on misdemeanor offenses.ZmudaOttawa 10/14/2025 10/14/2025 2025-Ohio-4731
Sutton v. Scarborough L-25-00005Judge Duhart. Summary judgment. Admissions. Unanswered. Jurisdiction.DuhartLucas 10/10/2025 10/10/2025 2025-Ohio-4690
Oakhill Invest., L.L.C. v. Toe L-25-00035Trial court abused its discretion granting appellee’s motion to disqualify the attorney for appellant. Judgment reversed. Osowik.OsowikLucas 10/10/2025 10/10/2025 2025-Ohio-4691
State v. Gibler WM-25-005Per Mayle, J. following defendant’s guilty plea, trial court did not err in failing to merge forgery and theft convictions. While the theft facilitated the forgery, these were separate and distinct acts and there were multiple victims of the theft, multiple instances of theft, and multiple instances of forgery.MayleWilliams 10/10/2025 10/10/2025 2025-Ohio-4689
In re S.L. WD-24-087Award of legal custody to maternal grandparents is not an abuse of discretion where children are well-bonded and want to live with the grandparents, are healthy and gaining weight, are enrolled in school and receiving supportive services, and grandparents are committed to facilitating visitation with mother. Agency made reasonable efforts where it provided substance abuse, mental health, and parenting services to mother and offered to help her secure housing closer to the children, which she refused.SulekWood 10/3/2025 10/3/2025 2025-Ohio-4608
State v. Hoffman WD-24-078, WD-24-080, WD-24-081Duhart. Under the facts of this case, trial court did not err in failing to merge convictions for menacing by stalking and violation of a protection order. Likewise, trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to argue in favor of merger.DuhartWood 10/3/2025 10/3/2025 2025-Ohio-4609
State v. Wahl WD-24-014 & WD-24-015Maximum prison term for purposes of calculating final termination of a commitment includes the indefinite maximum sentence provided for under the Reagan Tokes Law.SulekWood 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4576
State v. Rowell WD-25-013Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, finds a matter of law that appellant’s assigned error is not subject to this court’s review. Judgment affirmed.ZmudaWood 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4577
State v. Bickerstaff L-25-00057 & L-25-00058Per Judge Mayle, J., the trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea. Appellant’s claim is barred by res judicata and even if res judicata did not apply, appellant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pled after receiving clear explanations from the trial court that the minimum sentence in case No. CR-2022-1443 would be mandatory.MayleLucas 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4567
Kittel v. Hunt L-24-1294Trial court abused its discretion when it denied appellant’s Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment. Judgment reversed. OsowikOsowikLucas 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4570
State v. Craig L-24-1126Osowik - Prosecution failure to provide actual written witness pursuant to Crim R. 16 (I) was not willful violation of the rule where no prejudice is shown; Jury verdict was not against the Manifest Weight of the evidence.OsowikLucas 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4571
State v. Morgan L-24-1279Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the trial court’s sentencing order imposing two suspensions of appellant’s driver’s license as not contrary to law and vacates the portion of the sentencing order imposing costs of supervision.ZmudaLucas 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4572
State v. Rutledge L-24-1048Duhart. Affirming the trial court’s judgment, but remanding the case for a nunc pro tunc judgment entry reflecting the actual Revised Code section under which Rutledge was convicted for trafficking in cocaine.DuhartLucas 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4573
State v. Stone OT-25-007, OT-25-008, OT-25-009Judge Duhart. Consecutive sentences.DuhartOttawa 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4575
State v. Carswell S-24-006Trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying petition for postconviction relief following a hearing where defense counsel was not ineffective for cross-examining the State’s DNA expert witness instead of calling his own, and where there is no reasonable probability that the results of the proceeding would have been different in light of the other evidence presented at trial showing that he raped the victim.SulekSandusky 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4568
Am. Express Natl. Bank v. Scales E-25-009Trial court did not err in awarding summary judgment to credit card company where no genuine issue of material fact exists that the defendant opened a credit card, made $18,000 worth of purchases or transactions, stopped making payments on the card, and owed a final balance of $16,271.28.SulekErie 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4574
State v. Hinckley H-24-033, H-24-034, H-24-035Duhart. Affirming judgment of conviction and sentence because: (1) the sentence for driving under suspension (as argued by appellate counsel) was not contrary to law; and (2) because trial counsel’s performance was not deficient for failing to file motions to suppress evidence.DuhartHuron 9/30/2025 10/1/2025 2025-Ohio-4569
In re G.A. WM-25-011, WM-25-012, WM-25-014, WM-25-015, WM-25-016Per Mayle, J., the trial court did not err in terminating mother’s parental rights because its findings that the children could not be placed with mother in a reasonable time or should not be placed with mother, and that termination was in the best interest of the children were supported by the manifest weight of the evidence.MayleWilliams 9/29/2025 9/29/2025 2025-Ohio-4536
State v. Girad WD-24-089Per Zmuda, J., appellant’s convictions for rape under R.C. 2907.02(A)(2) and abduction under R.C. 2905.02(A)(2) do not merge because they were committed separately.ZmudaWood 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4494
State v. Knight S-24-001Jury’s finding of no self-defense not against the manifest weight of the evidence where defendant voluntarily entered a fist fight and stabbed the victim. Defendant’s confession after he invoked his right to counsel not in violation of Miranda where police had stopped the interrogation, and defendant reinitiated the conversation and re-waived his right.SulekSandusky 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4498
Banks v. Leading Families Home, Inc. L-24-1133Per Osowik, J., trial court improperly granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Civ.R. 12( C). The complaint set forth a set of facts that could plausibly make a case for racial discrimination and breach of contract.OsowikLucas 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4493
State v. Knighten L-24-1241Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, reverses the conviction for child endangering, finding no credible evidence to support the existence of a substantial risk of harm due to the failure of a duty to supervise the children, aged two and four, with the conviction based on impermissible speculation to find the substantial risk element satisfied by the record evidence.ZmudaLucas 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4495
Lockhart v. Anick L-24-1174Zmuda - Trial court did not abuse its discretion in adopting magistrate decision finding that appellant made a valid gift of dog and cat to appellee, but trial court erred in concluding that the appellant could not transfer ownership of the dog without a certificate in compliance with R.C. 955.11(B).ZmudaLucas 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4496
State v. Thompson F-24-009Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, finds that appellant’s assigned errors are unrelated to proceedings below and are disregarded pursuant to App.R. 12(A)(2).ZmudaFulton 9/26/2025 9/26/2025 2025-Ohio-4499
Glase v. Joshi L-24-1151Sulek, J. In a medical malpractice action involving a retinal specialist, the trial court erred when it excluded a general ophthalmologist’s (who treated similar patients) expert opinion. Contradictory affidavit; same or substantially similar; Evid.R. 601 and 702.SulekLucas 9/23/2025 9/23/2025 2025-Ohio-4438
State v. Thieman WD-24-079 & WD-24-082Sulek. Trial court did not unlawfully violate its promise to sentence Thieman to a maximum of 60 months in prison, because it: 1) informed Thieman that the reason for not upholding its promise was Thieman’s failure to participate in the PSI; and 2) allowed Thieman the opportunity to withdraw his plea. Trial counsel was not ineffective -- specific performance was not a remedy to which Thieman was entitled and, further, there is nothing to suggest that but for trial counsel’s agreement to proceed to sentencing the outcome of the proceedings would have been different.SulekWood 9/23/2025 9/23/2025 2025-Ohio-4439
State v. Belmon L-23-1296Per Mayle, J., trial court abused its discretion and committed prejudicial error requiring reversal when it prevented defense counsel from examining prospective jurors on topic of racial bias. Evidence was sufficient to support conviction of tampering with evidence where State presented evidence that soon after shooting incident, defendant searched area of shooting and walked away with something concealed in his shirt.MayleLucas 9/19/2025 9/19/2025 2025-Ohio-4400
State v. Valle S-24-008Trial court did not err in imposing R.C. 2929.18(B)(1) mandatory minimum fines. The totality of the record shows that the trial court considered appellant’s ability to pay prior to the imposition of the fines. Judgment affirmed.OsowikLucas 9/19/2025 9/19/2025 2025-Ohio-4401
In re J.H. H-25-007, H-25-008, H-25-009Zmuda, writing for the majority affirmed the judgment of the juvenile court which determined termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the children.ZmudaHuron 9/18/2025 9/18/2025 2025-Ohio-4383
State v. Williams E-24-048Judge Duhart. Presentence motion to withdraw plea. Clerical error. Nunc pro tunc entry.DuhartErie 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4352
Dickman v. Johnson L-25-00020Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the judgment denying relief under Civ.R. 60(B), as no basis argued under Civ.R. 60(B), with appellant’s assignments of error addressing matters from prior appeals not properly before the court.ZmudaLucas 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4349
State v. Dukett L-24-1278Duhart. Affirming judgment of sentence because: 1) the trial court considered the factors under R.C. 2929.11 R.C. 2929.12, properly applied postrelease control, and imposed a sentence within the statutory range; and 2) the sentence was not otherwise contrary to law.DuhartLucas 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4350
Brinkman v. Toledo City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. L-24-1274Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, finds that the trial court did not err in granting appellees’ motion for judgment on the pleadingsZmudaLucas 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4353
State v. Bulger S-24-025Duhart. Motion to withdraw plea. Res judicata.DuhartSandusky 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4348
State v. Elston WD-24-083Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, affirms the judgment, finding ineffective assistance of counsel not demonstrated where trial counsel acted according to appellant’s expressly stated wishes in opting to not file a motion to withdraw plea and proceeding to sentencing.ZmudaWood 9/16/2025 9/16/2025 2025-Ohio-4351
State v. Al-Murshidy WD-24-070Per Mayle, J., appellant’s appeal is moot because he voluntarily served his misdemeanor sentence without seeking a stay pending appeal and the record does not contain evidence of a collateral disability or loss of civil rights arising from the conviction.MayleWood 9/12/2025 9/12/2025 2025-Ohio-3302
123456