SCOH Lapel Pin Opinions and Announcements

Reporter of Decisions - Opinions & Announcements

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 237 rows. Rows per page: 
12345
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
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
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
State v. Wahl WD-24-014 & WD-24-15Maximum 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
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. 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. 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. 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
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
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. 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
State v. Gonzales WD-24-073Trial court properly denied appellant’s Crim.R. 29(A) motion for acquittal following a Bowling Green Municipal Court bench trial on one count of resisting arrest, in violation of R.C. 2921.33(A), a misdemeanor of the second degree. Judgment affirmed.DuhartWood 9/12/2025 9/12/2025 2025-Ohio-3305
State v. McNeal L-24-1184Zmuda, J., writing for the majority, finds that trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion to suppress. Judgment affirmed.ZmudaLucas 9/12/2025 9/12/2025 2025-Ohio-3304
Blus v. Civista Bank E-24-029, E-24-030Summary judgment to bank on consumers’ claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment affirmed. The agreements unambiguously allow the bank to impose non-sufficient funds ("NSF") Fees on debit card transactions that authorize into a positive balance and settle into a negative balance. They also allow imposition of NSF Fees on each item returned unpaid regardless of whether it was presented for the first, second, or third time. Claims of unjust enrichment must fail where a contract exists covering the same subject matter.DuhartErie 9/12/2025 9/12/2025 2025-Ohio-3303
State v. Boyd OT-24-022, OT-24-023Duhart. The trial court did not err in denying motion to suppress. The convictions were based on sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting text message evidence or in giving a complicity instruction.DuhartOttawa 9/9/2025 9/9/2025 2025-Ohio-3248
State v. Matthews OT-24-045, OT-24-046Sulek - Trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying post-sentence motion to withdraw guilty plea where appellant argues that he would have gone to trial but for counsel’s failure to inform him of the existence of search warrants prior to his plea but does not provide any evidence that the search warrants were defective to support his claim that evidence would have been suppressed.SulekOttawa 9/5/2025 9/5/2025 2025-Ohio-3175
State v. Wright WM-24-014State’s failure to recommend sentences be served concurrently not plain error where the trial court sentenced defendant on its own independent examination of his criminal record and the facts of the case.SulekWilliams 9/5/2025 9/5/2025 2025-Ohio-3176
Smith v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co. E-24-049Per Mayle, J., In a Federal Employers' Liability Act ("FELA") claim, trial court improperly excluded employee’s experts’ causation opinions. Treating physician was not required to provide an expert report under Civ.R. 26(B)(7)(d). Expert ergonomist utilized proper scientific method, there existed sufficient factual basis for opinions, and acceptable methodology was used. Railroad’s criticisms go to weight and not admissibility of opinions. Summary judgment improperly granted for railroad.MayleErie 9/2/2025 9/2/2025 2025-Ohio-3122
State v. Hall H-24-022 & H-24-023Per Mayle, J., although defense counsel was deficient in failing to object to questions eliciting hearsay and opinions about victim’s credibility, he was not deficient in failing to object to questions concerning victim’s childhood. Defendant failed to establish prejudice caused by counsel’s deficient performance.MayleHuron 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3099
State v. Manning L-24-1136Judge Duhart, R.C. 2953.08(D)(1), failure to hold restitution hearing was not error when amount of restitution was agreed to in plea agreement.DuhartLucas 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3101
State v. Snow L-24-1194Sulek, J. Trial counsel was not ineffective in failing to request that rape counts, involving separate victims, be severed for trial as the evidence in each case was simple and direct. Counsel’s failure to object to nonprejudicial statements made by the prosecutor during closing argument was not ineffective. Crim.R. 8; Crim.R. 14; prosecutorial misconduct; plain error.SulekLucas 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3104
State v. Williams L-24-1138Trial court error granting new trial because there was no extraneous prejudicial information on the jurors. Judgment reversed. Osowik.OsowikLucas 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3105
State v. Durst S-24-029Sulek, P.J. The trial court erred by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on the State’s failure to return appellant’s cellphone as previously ordered.SulekSandusky 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3103
Johnson v. Port Clinton OT-24-036Trial court errs in dismissing defamation claim where complaint alleges all elements of the claim. Claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress properly dismissed where facts alleged are not, as a matter of law, extreme or outrageous. Claim for retaliation properly dismissed where no basis exists to extend statutory claim for discrimination into a non-discrimination context. Declaratory judgment action for violation of due process does not state a claim where constitution does not provide an independent cause of action and where R.C. Chapter 124 provides adequate remedy of appeal.DuhartOttawa 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3100
State v. Newsome WD-24-074Judge Duhart. Clerical error. Sentence. Nunc pro tunc entry.DuhartWood 8/29/2025 8/29/2025 2025-Ohio-3102
McKitrick v. State S-24-030Sulek, J. The trial court erred by summarily denying appellant’s petition for a Certificate of Qualification for Employment under R.C. 2953.25 as untimely without considering the criteria set forth in Adm.Code 5120-15-01.SulekLucas 8/26/2025 8/26/2025 2025-Ohio-3047
State v. Walker WD-24-068Duhart. Reversing judgment of sentence on grounds that Walker was denied his right to allocution under Crim.R. 32(A)(1).DuhartLucas 8/26/2025 8/26/2025 2025-Ohio-3049
Univ. of Toledo v. Am. Assn. Univ. Professors L-24-1221Per Mayle, J., trial court improperly vacated arbitrator’s award because the arbitrator did not exceed his authority, the award drew its essence from the parties’ collective bargaining agreement, and the award was not arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.MayleLucas 8/22/2025 8/22/2025 2025-Ohio-3008
T.M. v. McNair OT-24-039Appellant failed to file timely objections to the trial court’s adoption of the magistrate’s decision granting a Civil Stalking Protection Order ("CSPO") as required by Civ.R. 65.1(G). For this reason, the appeal is dismissed.SulekOttawa 8/19/2025 8/19/2025 2025-Ohio-2960
State v. Jones E-24-009Duhart. Trial court erred by admitting other-acts evidence because state failed to show that it was for a non-propensity purpose, however the error was harmless. Also, appellant’s convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. Finally, appellant failed to establish that his trial counsel was ineffective.DuhartLucas 8/19/2025 8/19/2025 2025-Ohio-2958
State v. Kincade L-24-1200Sulek, J. In a felony case involving a mandatory fine, ineffective assistance of counsel is not shown where the record lacks evidence that had counsel filed an affidavit of indigency it would have been granted. R.C. 2929.18.SulekLucas 8/19/2025 8/19/2025 2025-Ohio-2959
12345
Home | Contact Us | Search |