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 82 rows. Rows per page: 
123456789
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Carver 19CA17CRIMINAL-CORPUS DELICTI RULE - Trial court did not err in determining Appellant's conviction was not in violation of the corpus delicti rule where there was some evidence of physical impairment of victim and thus, some evidence of a material element of the offense of rape.SmithHighland 10/13/2020 10/22/2020 2020-Ohio-4984
In re O.L.G.C. 19CA19Trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding custody of the parties’ minor child to the child’s mother.AbeleWashington 10/8/2020 10/21/2020 2020-Ohio-4981
Hampton v. Lively 19CA9adverse possession, adverse use, sales contract, purchase price, permissive, manifest weight of the evidenceHessLawrence 9/28/2020 10/1/2020 2020-Ohio-4713
In re D.S. 20CA905INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL-FAILURE TO REQUEST CONTINUANCE - Conclusory allegations of prejudice are not sufficient to demonstrate ineffective assistance and counsel's failure to request a continuance did not result in ineffective assistance of counsel where the trial court's decision was amply supported and there was no showing that the trial court would have reached a different conclusion if trial counsel had requested a continuance..SmithPike 9/24/2020 10/6/2020 2020-Ohio-4794
State v. Bartholomew 19CA29CRIMINAL-SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST - Probable cause for the defendant's arrest existed and thus the search incident to arrest was valid despite the fact that the arresting officer relied on a section of the criminal child enticement statue that had been previously declared unconstitutional, where the statute had been amended and reenacted at the time of the defendant's arrest.SmithPickaway 9/17/2020 9/25/2020 2020-Ohio-4611
State v. Thacker 18CA21rape, kidnapping, burglary, abduction, merger, firearm specification; manifest weight of the evidence; sufficiency of the evidence; other acts evidence; Evid.R. 404(B); Remmer hearing; outside communication with jury; motion for trial continuance; visual impairment; inability to assist defense; abuse of discretion; plain error; prejudice; ineffective assistance of counsel; hearsay; trial strategy; prosecutorial misconduct; vouching; motion for acquittal; venue; R.C 2901.12; cumulative error doctrineHessLawrence 9/16/2020 9/28/2020 2020-Ohio-4620
State v. Bradford 20CA1109Ineffective assistance of counsel–trial counsel did not perform ineffectively in weapons-under-disability trial by failing to file a motion to suppress evidence or by failing to object to evidence that appellant had a prior felonious assault conviction; filing motion to suppress would not have had a reasonable chance of success, and successfully objecting to evidence that appellant had a prior felonious assault conviction would not have led to a different result; appellant’s conviction was not against the manifest weight of the evidence even though the state did not present direct evidence that appellant actually possessed a weapon; instead, circumstantial evidence showed that appellant constructively possessed the weapon; the weapon was located in a bedroom officers believed belonged to appellant based upon prescription pill bottles and other items that contained appellant’s name.AbeleAdams 9/14/2020 9/23/2020 2020-Ohio-4563
State v. Stapleton 19CA7Evidence–trial court did not plainly err by allowing state to introduce digital evidence obtained from cell phones and social media accounts; trial court did not plainly err by imposing multiple punishments for pandering obscenity and pandering material involving a minor offenses; trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel.AbelePickaway 9/10/2020 9/17/2020 2020-Ohio-4479
In re K.M. 20CA4 & 20CA6Trial court’s determination it was in the children’s best interest to grant permanent custody to children services agency is not against the manifest weight of the evidence; and appellants expressly waived R.C. 2151.35(B)(1)’s mandatory deadline requiring a juvenile court to dismiss a case without prejudice if the court fails to conduct a dispositional hearing within 90 days of the filing of the complaint alleging that a child is abused, neglected or dependent.AbeleHighland 9/9/2020 9/17/2020 2020-Ohio-4476
Mick v. New Holland 19CA14CIVIL-JURISDICTION-FINAL APPEALABLE ORDER - The court of appeals is required to sua sponte raise threshold jurisdictional issue even if not raised by parties. A trial court judgment that orders reinstatement and back pay without determining the amount of back pay to be paid does not constitute a final appealable order because the determination of damages with the requisite specificity is part of determining the action.SmithPickaway 9/8/2020 9/17/2020 2020-Ohio-4475
123456789