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 92 rows. Rows per page: 
12345678910
Case CaptionCase No.Topics and IssuesAuthorCitation / CountyDecidedPostedWebCite
State v. Smith 9-17-05Trial court did not err in granting suppression motion.ShawMarion 7/17/2017 7/17/2017 2017-Ohio-5845
Cauthen v. Cauthen 9-17-01The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a credit against appellee's child support arrearage.PrestonMarion 7/17/2017 7/17/2017 2017-Ohio-5846
In re Adoption of M.S.A. 10-17-01The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying intervenor-appellant's motion to intervene in the private-adoption proceeding of M.S.A. Intervenor-appellant lacks standing to challenge the merits of the Probate Court's decision finalizing the private adoption or the procedure it used.PrestonMercer 7/10/2017 7/10/2017 2017-Ohio-5771
State v. Campbell 1-16-56The defendant's decision not to testify was influenced by the trial court. Case reversed and remanded for a new trial.ZimmermanAllen 7/3/2017 7/3/2017 2017-Ohio-5665
In re. B.W. 9-17-02; 9-17-03The trial court erred by granting permanent custody of B.W. and M.W. to Children Services. Case reversed and cause remanded.ZimmermanMarion 7/3/2017 7/3/2017 2017-Ohio-5666
State v. Kruse 14-16-15The trial court did not abuse its discretion by restricting investigator funds provided to the defense; Appellant's counsel was not ineffective; plain error does not exist in the court's admission of hearsay statements that were found to be exceptions under Evid.R. 803(2); and Appellant's convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The convictions of the Appellant are affirmed.ZimmermanUnion 7/3/2017 7/3/2017 2017-Ohio-5667
State v. Bentz 1-16-17The defendant-appellant's rape conviction under R.C. 2907.02(A)(2) and sexual battery conviction under R.C. 2907.03(A)(2) are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The defendant appellant's kidnapping conviction under R.C. 2905.01(A)(2) is based on insufficient evidence. The trial court erred in finding Bentz guilty of sexual battery in violation of R.C. 2907.03(A)(13) in light of the Supreme Court of Ohio's determination in State v. Mole that R.C. 2907.03(A)(13) is unconstitutional. 149 Ohio St.3d 215, 2016-Ohio-5124. The trial court did not consider irrelevant evidence when determining Bentz's credibility. The admission of evidence related to the elements of the now unconstitutional R.C. 2907.03(A)(13) does not warrant Bentz a new trial because that evidence was probative of whether Bentz was guilty of the other crimes for which he was on trial. Bentz's trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the State's asking K.A. leading questions during direct examination.PrestonAllen 6/26/2017 6/26/2017 2017-Ohio-5483
State v. Wilson 1-16-57The trial court did nor err in finding that the property description in the warrant was sufficient. The trial court did not err by denying the motion to exclude oral evidence because the applicable rule does not require the transcription of oral testimony prior to the execution of the warrantPrestonAllen 6/26/2017 6/26/2017 2017-Ohio-5484
State v. Fisher 2-17-03The trial court did not err in finding that the stop was jusfied by reasonable, articulable suspicion. The facts before the trial court supported a finding that there was probable cause to arrest even if the field sobriety tests were not properly performed.WillamowskiAuglaize 6/26/2017 6/26/2017 2017-Ohio-5485
Sigler v. Burk 3-16-19The trial court properly granted summary judgment to Appellees on the issue of testamentary capacity but erred in granting summary judgment on Appellant's claim of undue influence by not affording Appellant a presumption of undue influene due to the existence of a fiduciary relationship between the testator and appellees. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part and cause remanded. ZimmermanCrawford 6/26/2017 6/26/2017 2017-Ohio-5486
12345678910