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 73 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Smallwood v. Smallwood CA2017-03-030A stipulation is binding as a fact deemed adjudicated only after the stipulation is entered, filed, and accepted by the court. Though parties may be in general agreement to issues of valuation and allocation of marital property, the trial court does not err by relying on evidence in the record that establishes fact. However, this matter must be remanded because the trial court double-counted an amount in its recapitulation index, resulting in an error.RinglandButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1008
State v. Marcum CA2017-05-057State proved defendant's identity in robberies where several witnesses identified the defendant as the person depicted in security camera footage by their familiarity with his appearance, gait, and mannerisms. Trial court properly found that police could reasonably rely on defendant's wife's apparent authority to consent to search the defendant's home where they understood the wife left the home temporarily because of an argument, wife left her possessions at the home, and wife knew how to enter home despite not having a key. Error to admit evidence of other bad acts. However, the error did not raise to the level of plain error because the testimony was brief, not focused on by the parties, and substantial other evidence in the record supported the defendant's convictions. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the improper evidence.HendricksonButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1009
Winn v. Wilson CA2017-04-052The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding custody to appellee where the trial court reviewed all evidence and balanced the required statutory factors before determining that appellee having custody was in the children's best interests. The trial court abused its discretion by awarding retroactive child support because there where special circumstances that made the retroactive date of the filing of appellee's motion prejudicial to appellant because appellant had been paying for the children's expenses since the time of appellee's motion.PiperButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1010
Rarden v. Ewen CA2017-05-064Trial court's decision denying a motion to vacate a void judgment was appropriate where the trial court had jurisdiction over the matter and the parties, and the order dismissing the case was not void.RinglandButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1011
State v. Harris CA2017-09-140Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1012
State v. Gingerich CA2017-09-145Anders no error.Per CuriamButler 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1013
State v. Lilly CA2017-06-029, CA2017-06-030Trial court did not err in sentencing defendant to aggregate 60-month prison term.HendricksonClermont 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1014
State v. Pettiford CA2017-05-010The trial court correctly overruled appellant's motion to suppress where officers seized evidence in plain view and entered appellant's home because of exigent circumstances where officer safety, safety of others, and possible evidence destruction created probable cause of an emergency situation.PiperFayette 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1015
State v. Powih CA2017-09-136Anders no error.Per CuriamWarren 3/19/2018 3/19/2018 2018-Ohio-1016
State v. Curtis CA2017-08-010Appellant's arguments pertaining to the trial court's imposition of his sentence for murder in 2009 were barred by res judicata where he could have, and should have, raised the arguments on direct appeal. Further, the trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion for a de novo sentencing hearing where the trial court complied with this court's remand instructions by issuing a nunc pro tunc entry to correct errors contained in the court's 2009 sentencing entry.HendricksonBrown 3/12/2018 3/12/2018 2018-Ohio-911