Court Filings

The Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed Austin Eugene Spargo's direct appeal from a trial court order revoking his probation because such appeals must be pursued by applying for a discretionary appeal under state law. The court explained that compliance with the discretionary-appeal procedure is jurisdictional, cited statute and precedent, and concluded it lacked jurisdiction to hear the direct appeal, so the appeal was dismissed.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Ralph J. Gipple’s motions to revise his sentencing entries to increase jail-time credit. Gipple argued that all days he spent confined across three separate cases should be applied to the concurrent prison terms, relying on State v. Fugate. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion because Fugate applies only where pretrial confinement was attributable to multiple offenses simultaneously; here, Gipple’s confinement periods were not entirely overlapping and the trial court properly applied jail-time credit only to the offenses for which he was confined. The convictions and concurrent sentences remain affirmed.

The Court of Appeals dismissed Brian K. Woofter’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Woofter, criminally charged in municipal court for purchasing and selling alcohol to minors, had the charge dismissed and then sought return of six cases of alcohol seized by the sheriff. The trial court denied his motion but said it could be reconsidered if Woofter produced proof of purchase. The appellate court held that the denial was not a final, appealable order because it anticipated further action and did not affect a substantial right or foreclose effective relief on the motion.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Ashtabula County Common Pleas Court’s sentence of two years of community control for Maurice D. Turner following his guilty pleas to two fifth‑degree felonies (breaking and entering and aggravated possession of drugs). The parties jointly recommended community control with treatment, and the trial court ordered Turner to successfully complete the NEOCAP residential program as a condition. Because the sentence was jointly recommended, authorized by law, and neither Turner nor counsel objected at plea or sentencing, the appellate court held R.C. 2953.08(D)(1) bars review and affirmed.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the Portage County Common Pleas court's denial of Austin Mehring’s successive petition for post-conviction relief without a hearing. Mehring had pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and misdemeanor assault in 2022, did not appeal, and later filed untimely post-conviction petitions claiming newly discovered exculpatory cellphone video and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held it lacked jurisdiction to consider the successive petition because Mehring failed to meet the statutory exceptions in R.C. 2953.23(A), and his claims were barred by res judicata, so no evidentiary hearing was required.

The Ohio Court of Appeals reviewed Ashley K.M. Kendrick’s challenge to her aggregate 23-month prison sentence following multiple community-control violations and a new felony conviction. The court held that the trial court had provided adequate notice of the possible prison-range at the original community-control sentencing hearings, did not err by imposing reserved/suspended prison terms while imposing community control, and permissibly ordered one new felony sentence to run consecutively to earlier concurrent reserved terms. The appellate court corrected a clerical discrepancy in the judgment entry and modified the record to reflect an aggregate 23-month term, then affirmed as modified.

The Court of Appeals reversed a municipal court conviction for operating a vehicle under the influence (OVI) because officers lacked reasonable articulable suspicion to extend a traffic stop and administer field sobriety tests. Ingram was pulled over for an unlit rear license plate, admitted having a drink earlier, and officers testified to smelling alcohol from the vehicle, but there was no erratic driving, no notable eye or speech impairment, and body-cam statements conflicted about odor and signs of impairment. The appellate court held the totality of circumstances did not justify prolonging the stop, vacated the conviction, and remanded for further proceedings.

The Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lake County Common Pleas Court’s denial of Julio C. Diaz’s postjudgment motion seeking a hearing under R.C. 2947.23(B) to perform community service in lieu of paying $2,260 in court costs. Diaz argued the court should have held a hearing because he had not paid the costs. The appeals court found the record did not show he failed to pay or defaulted under an approved payment schedule, and the clerk’s letter about potential commissary garnishment did not establish a basis for a hearing. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion without a hearing.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed a 90-day jail sentence plus two years of community-control supervision imposed on Aaron Hoover after he pled guilty to a first-degree misdemeanor domestic-violence offense. The court reviewed whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing and concluded the sentence was within statutory limits and not unreasonable. The trial judge considered the presentence report, victim injury, the defendant’s alcohol issues, and the use of a firearm; the appellate court found no affirmative showing the trial court failed to consider required factors.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Noble County Common Pleas Court's October 28, 2025 denial of Daniel T. McElfresh’s motions seeking return of $475 and contempt against the sheriff. McElfresh had pleaded guilty to aggravated possession and later claimed money seized in 2021 was never returned. The record and sheriff jail records showed the $475 was placed in McElfresh’s commissary account on March 8, 2021, and the remaining funds were applied to outstanding jail fees. Because the money had been returned and applied to McElfresh’s debt, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief.

The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment adjudicating Pierre Damond Hall guilty and sentencing him to nine years’ imprisonment after revoking deferred adjudication for methamphetamine possession, but it modified the judgment to delete a $1,550 fine that was included in the written judgment without being orally pronounced at the adjudication hearing. Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief finding no arguable grounds for appeal but asked the court to remove the unpronounced fine. The Court of Appeals conducted an independent review, found no reversible error affecting liberty, and deleted the unsupported fine while granting counsel’s motion to withdraw.

A Rusk County jury convicted Justin Tremane Simon of aggravated robbery and sentenced him to seventy years’ imprisonment. On appeal Simon argued the evidence was insufficient to prove he was the robber and that the trial court erred by instructing jurors they could consider good-conduct time when assessing punishment. The Court of Appeals upheld the conviction, finding the circumstantial evidence (possession of pharmacy stock bottles, a damp hoodie, a pill on his person, his presence at his mother’s home tied to the victim’s phone pings, and false statements to police) supported a rational verdict. The court also found the jury-charge error regarding good-conduct time did not cause egregious harm given the overall charge, the evidence, counsel’s arguments, and no jury inquiries.

The Court of Appeals of Texas, Sixth District, affirmed appellant Joseph Bebout West Jr.'s conviction for family-violence assault and one-year sentence. West challenged the denial of his motion for new trial, claiming a juror (the Longview mayor) created bias, and argued the jury charge omitted a consent instruction. The court found West forfeited the juror complaint because defense counsel failed to ask voir dire questions that would have revealed the mayoralty and that no evidence supported a consent instruction. Because the record supports the trial court's rulings, the conviction was affirmed.

The Court of Appeals of the Sixth Appellate District (Texarkana) denied John Henry Garber’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order forcing the Delta County court to rule on multiple pro se pretrial motions in three misdemeanor cases. The court found the record Garber supplied inadequate to show he had a clear, ministerial right to the relief because the registers show he failed to appear at a December 16, 2024 hearing and a warrant issued; there is no record he was re-arrested or returned to custody. The court emphasized mandamus requires a complete record and that a relator must show a clear right to relief, which Garber did not do.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Cecil McCray from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Alachua County and, in a per curiam opinion dated April 27, 2026, affirmed the lower court's decision. The opinion is brief: the court issued a unanimous affirmance without published opinion or extended reasoning, and the three-judge panel concurred. The decision notes that it is not final until any timely post-decision motion under Florida appellate rules is resolved.

The First District Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the trial court's decision in the criminal case of Byron Lee v. State of Florida. The opinion is per curiam and short: the appellate court reviewed the circuit court's ruling and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the judgment. The decision was issued April 27, 2026, and the panel noted concurrence by the chief and two other judges. The opinion is not final until the time for certain post-opinion motions expires under Florida appellate rules.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Naymontie N. Enoch from a decision of the Circuit Court for Alachua County. The appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief and provides no extended reasoning in the published entry; the court noted concurrence by all judges and reminded parties that the decision is not final until the time for authorized post-decision motions has passed.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed Da’vhon Young’s appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. The per curiam opinion consists only of the single-word disposition “DISMISSED” with concurrence from three judges. No substantive reasoning or discussion of issues appears in the published entry, and the opinion notes that it is not final until any timely authorized motion under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure is resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal considered Blake Robb's appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County. After review, the court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 27, 2026, simply stating the judgment is affirmed. No additional opinion or reasoning was provided in the published entry; the three-judge panel concurred and directed that the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion is resolved under Florida appellate rules.

The First District Court of Appeal dismissed Johnnie Peacock's appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The opinion is a brief per curiam entry, announces dismissal, and notes that the panel judges concurred. The order informs the parties that the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331 is resolved. No written opinion explaining the reasons for dismissal is included in the document.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed appellant Marshay Coggins's appeal as untimely. The appeal arose from a decision of the Circuit Court for Jefferson County and was reviewed by a three-judge panel. The court issued a short per curiam order dismissing the appeal for failure to file within the required time, with all three judges concurring and noting the decision is not final until any timely, authorized motion under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure is resolved.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an application for discretionary appeal in the criminal case of Joseph McClellan Raines (LC No. 2017CR0650) and denied the application on April 24, 2026. The order is brief and procedural: the court simply records that the application for discretionary review is denied, without published reasoning or discussion of the merits. The document is a certified court minute entry signed by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence of Mashhud Petaway for felonious assault following a jury trial. Petaway challenged pretrial identification, admission of firearm photographs from his phone, limitations on cross-examination of the victim about mental health, sufficiency and weight of the evidence, cumulative error, the Reagan Tokes sentencing law, and imposition of firearm specifications. The court upheld the trial court’s rulings, finding the photographic evidence admissible (or harmless if not), the limitation on cross-examination permissible without a proffered nexus to impairments, the evidence sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence, and the sentencing (including firearm specifications) lawful under Ohio precedent.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment convicting Daryl Anderson Dillard after he pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, vandalism, and one count of OVI. Dillard argued his trial counsel was ineffective for permitting guilty pleas instead of no-contest pleas because guilty pleas waived his ability to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. The appellate court held Dillard failed to show prejudice or deficient performance: the record did not show the State would have accepted no-contest pleas on the same terms and there is no evidence what advice counsel gave, so any off-the-record claims must be raised in post-conviction proceedings.

The Montgomery County Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentence of Robert Crowder Jr. after a jury trial. Crowder was convicted of trespass in a habitation, breaking and entering (merged for sentencing), forgery of an elderly person’s deed, tampering with records, and two counts for false representation as an attorney. The court held there was sufficient evidence and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence because J.C. and his electrician came to the house while Crowder remained there. The court also rejected Crowder’s challenge to merger of the forgery and record-tampering counts, finding separate victims (J.C. and the government).

The Court of Appeals affirmed the defendant Precious Carmichael’s convictions following a jury trial for strangulation (fourth-degree felony) and child endangering (first-degree misdemeanor). Carmichael had sought jury instructions on a reasonable parental-discipline defense and moved to exclude certain prior-bad-acts evidence; she also challenged sufficiency/weight of the evidence and alleged ineffective assistance. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in denying the instruction or excluding evidence, concluded the State presented legally sufficient and not-contradicted evidence (including the child’s testimony, bruising and a cord pattern of injury), and rejected the ineffective-assistance claim.

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed Chelsey Lynn Boggs’s conviction and sentence for two counts of fentanyl possession after she violated intervention in lieu of conviction. The trial court terminated ILC, found her guilty and imposed three years of community control, including a residential term at the West Central community-based correctional facility. Boggs argued the West Central requirement was unnecessary and that the court erred by not obtaining a professional assessment first. The appellate court held the requirement was authorized, found no statutory mandate requiring a pre-sentence assessment for that residential sanction, and noted the issue may be moot if she already completed the program.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed Dean Dominique Gore’s convictions for engaging in prostitution and possession of criminal tools arising from an undercover online sting. Police posted an ad, Detective Haueter communicated with Gore by text and provided a false rendezvous location; officers observed Gore’s vehicle acting like it was searching for the address, stopped and arrested him, seized his phone, and later obtained his consent to search it. The court held the stop and seizure were supported by reasonable suspicion and probable cause, the phone seizure and subsequent consented search were lawful, and the evidence supported the convictions.

The Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed Dennis Thompson Jr.’s conviction for strangulation following a jury trial in Fulton County. Thompson was acquitted of domestic violence but convicted under R.C. 2903.18(B)(3) after the victim and witnesses testified that Thompson gripped the victim’s neck, causing pain, difficulty breathing, and visible bruising. The court held the evidence was legally sufficient and the verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, rejecting defense arguments about inconsistent witness accounts, lack of expert medical proof, and brief contact with the victim’s neck.

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed Anthony Mitchell’s convictions for aggravated murder, murder, felonious assault, aggravated burglary, and strangulation following a jury trial. The court found sufficient evidence linking Mitchell to the killing—most importantly, Mitchell’s DNA was found under the victim’s left fingernails and a new scar near his eye supported a struggle—so a rational juror could find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also rejected arguments that strangulation should have merged with aggravated murder, found the bill of particulars claim forfeited without prejudice, and rejected ineffective-assistance claims.