|
|
State v. Quinn
| L-25-00280 | Per Mayle, J., trial court did not abuse discretion when it denied appellant’s motion for funds for DNA expert and new trial. Appellant was granted funds before his 2005 trial and was on notice then that not all samples were tested. Appellant was permitted to conduct independent DNA testing “solely” at his expense and should have understood that he was responsible for costs associated with interpreting results. Appellant failed to seek leave to file motion for new trial as required under Crim.R. 33(B). | Mayle | Lucas |
7/7/2026
|
7/7/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2578 |
|
Hofbauer v. Patel
| L-25-00281 | Duhart. Trial court properly dismissed Hofbauer’s complaint and did not abuse its discretion in failing to allow amendment of the complaint. | Duhart | Lucas |
6/30/2026
|
6/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2507 |
|
Estate of Mikulski v. Toledo Edison Co.
| L-25-00183 | Shareholder’s mere receipt of tax forms in 1985 and 1986 that allegedly mischaracterized distributions as dividends instead of return of capital, without a corresponding allegation of financial harm or loss, is not a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing. | Sulek | Lucas |
6/30/2026
|
6/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2508 |
|
State v. Lowry
| L-25-00041 | Judge Duhart. Appellant’s convictions for menacing and telecommunications harassment were not based on insufficient evidence nor were they against the manifest weight of the evidence. | Duhart | Lucas |
6/30/2026
|
6/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2509 |
|
State v. Price
| L-25-00181 | Duhart. Affirming judgment of trial court denying appellant’s motion to suppress photo array evidence. | Duhart | Lucas |
6/30/2026
|
6/30/2026
| 2026-Ohio-2512 |
|