|
| Case Caption | Case No. | Topics and Issues | Author | Citation / County | Decided | Posted | WebCite |
|
Smith v. Smith
| 27849 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in terminating the parties' shared parenting agreement and designating mother as the legal and custodial parent. The parties had not actively engaged in "shared" parenting or had any direct communication for many years. Further, child's desire for a change in the parenting arrangement was entitled to significant weight. Judgment affirmed. | Froelich | Montgomery |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1531 |
|
State v. Lawson
| 2017-CA-28 | Defendant-appellant has not demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the record does not support the sentences imposed by the trial court. Further, Defendant-appellant's sentences are not subject to vacation under R.C. 2929.13(B)(1)(c), and the trial court correctly calculated the amount of jail time credit to which Defendant-appellant is entitled. Judgment affirmed. (Froelich, J., concurring.) | Tucker | Champaign |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1532 |
|
State v. Kaeser
| 2017-CA-29 | We find no arguable merit to this appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Appellant had pled guilty to one count of Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a Minor and one count of Corrupting Another with Drugs, and he was sentenced to community control sanctions in October 2014. He did not appeal the convictions. In July 2015, he failed to report and absconded. On October 6, 2017, appellant admitted to community control violations and was sentenced to prison consistent with the sentences reserved at the time of the original conviction. There are no non-frivolous issues supporting a potential assignment of error of arguable merit. Judgment affirmed. | Hall | Champaign |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1533 |
|
Helms v. Thomas
| 27744 | The trial court did not err by appointing a receiver over property owned by Appellee R Boulevard Properties, LLC. There is clear and convincing evidence to support the trial court's decision that the appointment was appropriate and necessary. Judgment affirmed. | Hall | Montgomery |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1534 |
|
Gillespie v. Waterwheel Farms, Inc.
| 2017-CA-16 | The trial court erred in entering summary judgment against the appellant on his strict-liability dog-bite claim under R.C. 955.28(B). Genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether a criminal-trespass affirmative defense to strict liability applied. Judgment reversed and cause remanded. | Hall | Miami |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1535 |
|
Cropper v. Cropper
| 2017-CA-13 | The Defendant-appellant has not caused a transcript of the proceedings before the trial court to be prepared and filed. As such, the regularity of the trial court proceedings must be presumed. Judgment affirmed. (Froelich, J., concurring.) | Tucker | Champaign |
4/20/2018
|
4/20/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1536 |
|
State v. Burns
| 27374 | Defendant-appellant's counsel filed a brief under the authority of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) concluding that there are no meritorious issues to present on appeal. In addition, Appellant has raised no non-frivolous issues for appellate review. After conducting an independent review of the record, consistent with our duty under Anders, we also find no issues with arguable merit for appeal. Affirmed. | Tucker | Montgomery |
4/13/2018
|
4/13/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1419 |
|
Conner v. Scott
| 27547 | The record does not portray error in the trial court's dismissal of two competing small-claims complaints on the basis that the claims they asserted were required to have been raised in a prior lawsuit between the parties. Judgment affirmed. | Hall | Montgomery |
4/13/2018
|
4/13/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1420 |
|
State v. DeVaughns
| 27727 | The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Appellant's Crim.R. 33 motion for new trial, as the motion was untimely and Appellant failed to provide clear and convincing proof that he was unavoidably prevented from timely filing the motion. In addition, Appellant's challenge to this court's decision in one of his prior appeals is not properly before this court, as Appellant's recourse was to seek reconsideration pursuant to App.R. 26(A), or to have the decision be considered by the Supreme Court of Ohio. Affirmed. | Welbaum | Montgomery |
4/13/2018
|
4/13/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1421 |
|
State v. Gray-Mosher
| 27605 | The trial court did not err in overruling the appellant's suppression motion. The record reflects a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of the appellant's Miranda rights prior to his jailhouse interview with a detective. Nothing in the record suggests that the appellant's statements during the interview were involuntary. The appellant's seven-year prison sentence for felonious assault is not contrary to law, and the record does not clearly and convincingly fail to support it. Judgment affirmed. | Hall | Montgomery |
4/13/2018
|
4/13/2018
| 2018-Ohio-1422 |
|