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

Reporter of Decisions - Opinions & Announcements

Opinion Search Filter Settings
Use standard search logic for the full-text search.
Opinion Text Search:    What is Opinion Text Search?
Source:   What is a Source?
Year Decided:   What is Decided?
County:   What is Decided?
Case Number:   What is Case Number?
Author:   What is Decided?
Topics and Issues:   What is Decided?
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 70 rows. Rows per page: 
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Lytle 13AP-866Convictions for conspiracy to commit murder, abduction, aggravated burglary, and violation of a protection order were supported by the manifest weight of the evidence. Conviction for kidnapping was entered in error on a guilty verdict for conspiracy to commit kidnapping and is vacated. Matter remanded for new entry reflecting correct convictions and sentences.BrownFranklin 3/26/2015 3/26/2015 2015-Ohio-1133
In re D.M.D. 14AP-289Trial court did not err by overruling objection to magistrate's decision classifying appellant as a Tier III sex offender/child-victim offender. The magistrate did not err by failing to apply the factors enumerated in R.C. 2152.83(D) in making the classification; by its own terms that statutory provision did not apply to the classification hearing because appellant was 16 at the time of the offense. The classification did not violate appellant's due process rights because it was not the type of automatic, lifelong registration previously found unconstitutional by the Ohio Supreme Court. The judgment finding appellant guilty of rape was not against the manifest weight of the evidence; the trial court considered the issues surrounding the credibility of the victim and still found her to be a credible witness.DorrianFranklin 3/26/2015 3/26/2015 2015-Ohio-1134
State v. Dennison 14AP-486The trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences without making the required proportionality finding at the sentencing hearing pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).DorrianFranklin 3/26/2015 3/26/2015 2015-Ohio-1135
State v. Williams 14AP-546Appellant's conviction for murder, in violation of R.C. 2903.02, with a corresponding firearm specification and conviction for having a weapon under disability, in violation of R.C. 2923.13, were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest wieght of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 3/26/2015 3/26/2015 2015-Ohio-1136
State v. Cochran 14AP-447Reversed and remanded. The sentencing package doctrine had been rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court. Thus, a decision which reverses and remands for resentencing less than all counts of a multiple-count sentence, does not disturb the sentences on the other counts. Resentencing upon remanded counts is de novo and any applicable reductions in penalties must be applied to those counts pursuant to R.C. 1.58(B).BrunnerFranklin 3/24/2015 3/24/2015 2015-Ohio-1102
State v. J.T.S. 14AP-516In an appeal from a conviction and sentence from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas resulting from a mandatory bindover proceeding, appellant's assignments of error challenging the juvenile court's acceptance of a stipulation as to the existence of probable cause, the constitutionality of the statutory provisions requiring mandatory transfers to adult court, and alleged ineffective assistance of counsel are without merit and overruled. Judgment affirmed.SadlerFranklin 3/24/2015 3/24/2015 2015-Ohio-1103
Scott v. Nameth 14AP-630The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment because appellants failed to allege or demonstrate actual, compensable damages.Luper SchusterFranklin 3/24/2015 3/24/2015 2015-Ohio-1104
State v. Smoot 14AP-671; 14AP-672; 14AP-673The trial court erred when it imposed consecutive sentences without first making the statutory findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C). Luper SchusterFranklin 3/24/2015 3/24/2015 2015-Ohio-1105
Fisher v. Mallik 14AP-140Trial court did not err when it granted motions to dismiss.BrownFranklin 3/19/2015 3/19/2015 2015-Ohio-1008
State ex rel. Gualdoni v. Indus. Comm. 14AP-316Industrial Commission did not abuse its discretion in finding that relator had reached maximum medical improvement and in terminating his temporary total disability benefits. Unline in State ex rel. Sellards v. Indus. Comm., 108 Ohio St.3d 306, 2006-Ohio-1058, the doctor's report was not premature and was "some evidence" upon which the commission could rely where the doctor's evaluation considered the relator's treatment over the past three years, the relator's MCO rather than the commission authorized additional treatment, and the date when relator began medication was unclear from the evidence. Writ of mandamus denied.SadlerFranklin 3/19/2015 3/19/2015 2015-Ohio-1009