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 71 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
Tillimon v. Pennington L-18-1157The trial court abused its discretion in applying post hoc review to the facts to find a willful violation of Civ.R. 11 and frivolous conduct, pursuant to R.C. 2323.51.ZmudaLucas 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1031
State v. Moore L-17-1291Prison sentence clearly and convincingly supported by the record, with challenge to consecutive sentences not before the court on appeal. Appellant failed to appeal the judgment in a separate case, imposing a sentence to run consecutively to the sentence on appeal.ZmudaLucas 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1032
State v. McDonald L-18-1109Sentence imposed pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(C)(1)(a), not R.C. 2929.14(C)(4). R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(f)’s language now codified under R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(g). No prejudice demonstrated, and failure to notify as set forth in language of R.C. 2929.19(B)(2)(g) at sentencing does not constitute prejudicial error or automatic reversal.SingerLucas 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1034
State v. Snell WD-18-004Appellant’s guilty plea waived alleged discovery errors; the state did not breach the plea agreement. PietrykowskiWood 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1033
Wyper v. DuFour WD-18-050Trial court properly found that appellant was not entitled to exclusive occupancy of certain trust real estate, where the clear and unambiguous language contained in the trust agreement granted appellant exclusive occupancy of another piece of trust real estate.ZmudaWood 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 2019-Ohio-1035
State v. Holmes L-17-1111Trial court properly allowed testimony about victim’s hearsay statements. Appellant’s conviction is supported by sufficient evidence; the jury reasonably chose to believe statements victim made the day after the rape over her trial testimony. Appellant’s conviction is not against the weight of the evidence; the jury choosing to believe only parts of victim’s testimony did not create a manifest miscarriage of justice. Trial counsel’s actions were trial strategy, not ineffective assistance of counsel.MayleLucas 3/15/2019 3/15/2019 2019-Ohio-896
State v. Brown OT-18-021Trial court did not err in appellant’s change of plea colloquy. Appellant properly stipulated to sufficient facts in support of guilty finding. Judgment affirmed.OsowikOttawa 3/15/2019 3/15/2019 2019-Ohio-894
State v. Clemens E-18-032The record reflects no abuse of discretion in the denial of appellant’s pro se, “Motion for Immediate Relief From a Fraud Upon the Court.” Judgment affirmed.OsowikErie 3/15/2019 3/15/2019 2019-Ohio-895
Pluck v. Williams E-18-043In appeal of small-claims court decision, court did not abuse discretion in granting judgment to defendant. Even if not required to present expert testimony in small claims court, plaintiff must present reliable evidence. Plaintiff failed to file transcript of proceedings or App.R. 9(C) statement of evidence and evidence as summarized by small-claims court is insufficient to show that appellant met burden of proving claim with reliable evidence.MayleErie 3/15/2019 3/15/2019 2019-Ohio-897
State v. Harris E-18-013Trial counsel was not ineffective where appellant received a sentence of 16 months in prison after pleading guilty to an amended charge of aggravated assault. Appellant faced a potential maximum prison sentence of over 80 years on the original charges, and counsel’s statements during mitigation were appropriately brief in light of appellant’s extensive criminal history and the lack of mitigating circumstances present in the record.ZmudaErie 3/8/2019 3/8/2019 2019-Ohio-813
12345678