Court Filings
247 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
State v. Meads
The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Marion Municipal Court’s denial of Nicholas Meads’ 2025 request to expunge a 2019 disorderly conduct conviction. Meads had pleaded no contest in 2019 and later violated community control, resulting in a 10-day jail term. At the expungement hearing the prosecutor did not object, but the victim opposed expungement and described continued harassment. Meads presented no testimonial or documentary evidence. The trial court found the government’s interest in maintaining the record outweighed Meads’ interest, and the appeals court held the decision was supported by the record.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals9-25-19State v. Lochtefeld
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the Bellefontaine Municipal Court conviction of Eric Lochtefeld for driving under an administrative suspension (R.C. 4510.14). The appeal challenged the weight of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and exclusion of evidence that Lochtefeld held a valid Florida license. The court found the Florida license irrelevant because Ohio suspension rules apply to Ohio driving privileges and are triggered when an arresting officer reads the suspension notice after a chemical-test refusal. The court concluded the jury reasonably found Lochtefeld had been told his Ohio privileges were suspended and counsel’s performance caused no prejudice.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals8-25-18In re R.C.
The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s dispositions adjudicating R.G. and R.C. juvenile traffic offenders. Both juveniles challenged the denial of motions to suppress statements they made to police without receiving Miranda warnings. The appellate court concluded the encounters occurred at the juveniles’ workplace, were brief and unrestrained, and did not involve physical restraint, threats, or coercive tactics; therefore the questioning was not custodial and Miranda warnings were not required. The court also found the statements were voluntary under the totality of the circumstances.
OtherAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals14-25-40; 14-25-41State v. Barrow
The Twelfth District Court of Appeals affirmed Geoffery Barrow's conviction for fifth-degree theft arising from four shoplifting incidents at a Nike outlet totaling $2,334.44. The court reviewed Barrow's speedy-trial, sufficiency, and evidentiary challenges. It held Barrow forfeited some speedy-trial claims by failing to move to dismiss in the trial court and by absconding, which reset the speedy-trial clock. The court found the evidence (surveillance video, store receipts, witness testimony, and items recovered from Barrow's vehicle) sufficient to prove the aggregate value exceeded $1,000. Any evidentiary errors were harmless.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsCA2025-06-047Klein Eng., L.L.C. v. Thiemann
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Butler County trial court's adoption of a magistrate's decision awarding Klein Engineering $233,554.95 in compensatory damages and $50,000 in punitive damages. Appellants (Thiemann) argued they were denied a fair trial because the magistrate issued its decision 15 months after a bench trial and the first day's proceedings were not recorded. The appellate court held Ohio civil and appellate rules provide remedies (recall witnesses, stipulations, affidavits, or an App.R. 9(C) statement) to reconstruct an unrecorded record, and Thiemann failed to use those procedures in the trial court, so remand or reversal was not warranted.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsCA2025-08-095Neal v. Stuff
The court reviewed an appeal by inmate Mourice Neal from the Richland County Common Pleas Court's dismissal of his writ of habeas corpus. The trial court had granted the warden's motion to dismiss Neal's petition, and the appellate court affirmed. The panel found Neal failed to support his assignments of error with citations to the record or legal authority as required by the appellate rules, so the court declined to consider the substantive claims and upheld the dismissal. Costs were assessed to Neal.
Habeas CorpusAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals2025 CA 0103State v. Hammond
The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed Clay A. Hammond’s conviction and sentence after he pled guilty to unlawful sexual conduct with a minor (fourth-degree felony) and received a five-year term of community control. The appellate court found counsel complied with Anders procedures and, after independent review, identified no meritorious issues. The court held the plea colloquy complied with Crim. R. 11, the jointly recommended sentence is not reviewable under R.C. 2953.08(D)(1), and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by prohibiting Hammond’s medical marijuana use as a condition of community control because R.C. 2929.17(H) authorizes drug-use monitoring. The appeal was found wholly frivolous and counsel’s withdrawal was permitted.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals25CA000031Urdiales v. Latin Am. Club of Defiance, Ohio
The Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Defiance County Common Pleas Court’s denial of the Latin American Club of Defiance, Ohio’s motion for relief from an August 16, 2022 default judgment under Ohio Civil Rule 60(B). The LAC argued the judgment should be vacated because the plaintiff secured the default through misconduct and inadequate service after the club had been dormant and its corporate charter cancelled. The appeals court held the trial court reasonably found service by publication appropriate, that the LAC failed to show extraordinary fraud on the court or timely fraud against a party, and therefore did not meet the requirements for relief under the governing Rule 60(B) standards.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals4-25-10In re K.B.
The Athens County Juvenile Court’s grant of permanent custody of two children to Athens County Children Services was affirmed on appeal. The children had been in agency custody for more than 12 of a consecutive 22-month period. The parents argued the award was against the manifest weight of the evidence and that the agency failed to make reasonable reunification efforts. The court held prior trial-court orders had already found reasonable efforts and that clear-and-convincing evidence supported that permanent custody served the children’s best interests given parental mental-health issues, unresolved interpersonal violence between the parents, the daughter’s refusal to reunify, and the children’s need for stability.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals25CA15, 25CA16State v. Whitney
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment revoking Miguel Whitney’s community control and sentencing him to 18 months in prison for violating the terms of his supervision. Whitney argued the trial court had failed to give the full statutory warnings under R.C. 2929.19(B)(4) when it imposed community control in 2021. The appellate court held that although some statutory warnings were omitted, Whitney suffered no prejudice because he had been explicitly told at the original sentencing that a violation could result in an 18-month prison term, and the trial court imposed that exact sanction after the violation.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsC-250349Kuchera v. Pfalzgraf
The First District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s adoption of a magistrate’s decision modifying parenting time for the parties’ minor son C.K., and partially granting a contempt finding and awards. The court held that modification was in C.K.’s best interest based on evidence that he was triggered by mother and preferred to reside primarily with father; the court found father in contempt only for failing to pay child support, not for other alleged violations. The court also affirmed allocation of guardian ad litem fees (split roughly two-thirds to father) and a small $500 attorney-fee award to mother.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsC-250453In re J.L.
The First District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s rulings awarding legal custody of J.L. to the maternal grandmother. The appeal arose from a custody petition filed by the grandmother after the child’s mother died and subsequent interim-custody orders. The appellate court found challenges to the interim emergency orders moot because the juvenile court later made a final custody determination. The court upheld the juvenile court’s finding that the father was an unsuitable parent based on abandonment and detriment to the child, and it affirmed denial of the father’s Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief for failure to plead operative facts warranting relief.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsC-250036State v. Sharpe
The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed Jeffrey Roscoe Sharpe’s convictions following a jury trial for cocaine possession, one count of having a weapon while under disability, and two counts of improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle. The court rejected Sharpe’s claims that his speedy-trial rights were violated, that a mistrial was required after the jury heard about a separate indictment, that the evidence was legally insufficient or against the weight of the evidence, that allied-offense merger was required, and that trial counsel was ineffective. The court concluded statutory speedy-trial procedures and evidentiary rules supported the convictions and found no plain or structural error that would justify reversal.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals2025-CA-1State v. Fowler
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment convicting Kevin Fowler of two counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor or impaired person. Fowler pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to two pandering counts; other counts were dismissed. He appealed, arguing his pleas did not comply with the criminal rule requiring that pleas be knowing and informed because the record lacked factual detail. The appellate court held that a guilty plea admits the facts in the indictment, Fowler stated he understood the charges, and the record shows his pleas were knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, so the conviction was affirmed.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals2025-CA-35State v. Coffey
The Montgomery County Court of Appeals affirmed Quinita L. Coffey’s conviction for domestic violence following a bench trial in Kettering Municipal Court. The court reviewed trial testimony from the victim (B.K.), two police officers, and Coffey, and found sufficient evidence that Coffey knowingly caused physical harm to B.K., the father of her child. The appellate court concluded the trial court reasonably credited the victim’s and officers’ testimony over Coffey’s account and held the verdict was neither legally insufficient nor against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30637In re K.M.H.
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed a juvenile court’s October 30, 2025 judgment granting legal custody of two children, K.M.H. and D.J.L.H., to their maternal grandparents. The grandparents had filed motions for custody after longstanding involvement with the children; a magistrate heard evidence in 2021, issued a decision in 2024, and after a status hearing in 2025 issued a new decision adopted by the trial court. The appellate court held the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction, found the October 30, 2025 order final and appealable, and concluded no plain error invalidated the custody award because the magistrate expressly found awarding custody to the mother would be detrimental and considered the children’s best interests.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30680In re B.H.
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s grant of permanent custody of B.H. to the Montgomery County Department of Job and Family Services (MCCS). The child entered agency custody shortly after birth and, despite periods of compliance, Mother repeatedly relapsed into substance abuse, missed services, lost housing, and failed to maintain regular contact or visitation. The court found MCCS had custody for more than 12 of 22 consecutive months, made reasonable reunification efforts, and that permanent custody was in the child’s best interest given the need for a stable, legally secure placement with foster parents willing to adopt.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30654State v. Redmond
The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Ross County Common Pleas Court’s judgment sentencing Kevin A. Redmond on guilty pleas to multiple drug counts. Redmond argued the trial court lost jurisdiction to sentence him because of an unreasonable delay between when he became available in custody and his November 8, 2024 sentencing. The appeals court held the delay was largely attributable to Redmond (he missed an earlier sentencing and incurred other charges), R.C. 2941.401 did not apply to a defendant already convicted and awaiting sentencing, and Redmond failed to prove the prison warden or court received proper certified notice. The court therefore denied vacatur and affirmed the sentence.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals24CA42Allen v. Marre
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for defendant John A. Marre in a foreclosure/lien dispute brought by plaintiff John D. Allen. Allen claimed Marre agreed to pay him $365,000 and filed a UCC financing statement and lien when payment was not made. Marre submitted an affidavit and exhibits showing there was no enforceable contract or security interest, and Allen did not respond to the motion for summary judgment. The appellate court concluded no genuine issue of material fact existed and Marre was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals25AP-717State v. Woods
The court affirmed the trial court’s grant of defendant Terence Woods’s motion to suppress a firearm found in his apartment after officers entered without a warrant. The appellate court held that, while Woods’s actions could reasonably be viewed as implied consent for officers to enter the apartment, the officers’ subsequent warrantless protective sweep of the bedroom where the gun was seen exceeded what was justified under the Fourth Amendment. Because the State failed to prove the protective sweep fell within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement, the firearm must be suppressed.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals114861State v. Warren
The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed Derrick Warren’s convictions for four counts of rape and the trial court’s designation of him as a sexually-violent predator. Warren was tried for a 2012 attack on A.L.; a jury convicted him on the rape counts after hearing the victim’s testimony and DNA evidence linking Warren to semen and hairs collected in 2012. The court rejected Warren’s challenges to sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence and upheld the sexually-violent-predator finding based on his pattern of sexually-motivated offenses, including later related convictions in 2013 and 2019.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115327State v. Slaughter
The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed Deon Slaughter’s convictions after a jury trial for third-degree felony strangulation and domestic violence. The court reviewed three assignments of error: objections to a police detective’s lay-opinion testimony about strangulation, admission of the victim’s testimony that another case against Slaughter was dismissed hours earlier, and a claim that the convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court held the detective’s testimony admissible under Evid.R. 701, found the dismissed-case testimony part of the immediate background and relevant under Evid.R. 404(B), and concluded the jury’s verdicts were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115252State v. Rachells
The Court of Appeals affirmed Marvin Rachells’s conviction for aggravated murder and related offenses after a jury trial. Rachells challenged the sufficiency and weight of the evidence, a late discovery disclosure of cell-phone mapping, and his lawyers’ failure to request a continuance. The court found overwhelming circumstantial and direct evidence tying Rachells to the crime (vehicle and store video, clothing, DNA in the suspect vehicle, and the murder weapon in his safe), held the late disclosure was inadvertent and not prejudicial, and concluded defense counsel’s alleged omission did not create a reasonable probability of a different outcome.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115358State v. Lawrence
The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed Taze Lawrence’s convictions and sentences after he pleaded guilty to aggravated murder and aggravated robbery with three-year firearm specifications. The court rejected two challenges: (1) that the plea was invalid because the trial judge misstated which fines applied and failed to fully advise on fines, and (2) that the sentencing court failed to give full notifications required by the Reagan Tokes Law. The court found no prejudice from the partial advisements because no fines were imposed and the Reagan Tokes advisements could not practically affect Lawrence’s concurrent life sentence.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115383State v. Franklin
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Stetson Franklin’s motion to suppress evidence found during a warrantless search of his vehicle after a traffic stop. Officers stopped Franklin for speeding, observed a loaded magazine in the center console, learned he was prohibited from possessing firearms, and summoned a drug dog. After Franklin was removed from the car, officers performed a protective sweep of the passenger compartment and discovered a loaded firearm. The court held the sweep reasonable given officer safety concerns and that the canine sniff did not unreasonably extend the stop.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115200State v. Etheridge
The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Christopher Etheridge’s 2025 petition for postconviction relief. Etheridge, sentenced in 2007 to life with parole eligibility after 28 years for aggravated murder and felonious assault following a guilty plea, argued the court failed to consider his youth at sentencing. The appeals court held his petition was untimely under R.C. 2953.21 because the direct-appeal transcripts were filed in 2008 and the 365-day filing window closed in 2009. The court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to consider Etheridge’s claim based on Ohio cases and therefore properly denied relief without findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115415S. Euclid v. Hall
The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed Datwan Hall’s conviction for domestic violence after a bench trial in South Euclid Municipal Court. The court held Hall was not entitled to claim self-defense because he uninvitedly entered the victim’s apartment, provoked the encounter by pushing past her and taking her phone, and thus created the situation that led to the altercation. The court also found trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a written notice of self-defense because asserting that defense would have been futile. Finally, the court concluded the State produced sufficient evidence, including testimony and injury photographs, to support the conviction.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115445MAZCleveland, L.L.C. v. Hall
The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of MAZCleveland and third-party defendant Steven Morris’s renewed motion for sanctions against defendant Sherry Hall under Ohio Rev. Code 2323.51. The appellants sought sanctions claiming Hall’s claims were frivolous and filed to harass, but the trial court determined the renewed motion merely restated previously-decided claims resolved by an agreed judgment. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion: winning on the merits does not by itself prove frivolousness, the statutory standard requires egregious conduct, and the trial court had sufficient familiarity with the prior proceedings to deny a hearing.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115389Lofty Holding 656 E. 126th St., L.L.C. v. 656 E. 126th, Ltd.
The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s default judgment against defendant-appellant Armand DiNardo in a dispute over lead-hazard remediation costs following Lofty Holding’s purchase of real property. Lofty served DiNardo by certified mail (returned unclaimed) and then by ordinary mail to a Kenwood Drive address; the clerk’s docket reflected ordinary-mail service and no return showing failure. The trial court held hearings and afforded DiNardo multiple chances to respond; DiNardo failed to appear or rebut service with convincing evidence. The appeals court held service was proper and the default judgment was valid.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115529In re S.B.
The Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s decision awarding legal custody and residence of minor S.B. to her mother. Father, appearing pro se, had sought shared parenting and custody but the trial court and guardian ad litem concluded the parents could not communicate effectively or set aside personal disputes for the child’s benefit. The appellate court found the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining shared parenting was not feasible and in designating Mother as the residential parent after considering statutory best-interest factors and trial testimony.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals115670