Court Filings

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court considered Mark LaVelle’s challenge to a Commonwealth Court standing order that deems candidates notified of petitions to set aside nomination petitions when the court posts the filing on its public website. LaVelle argued this practice violates Section 977 of the Election Code, which requires an order specifying the time and manner of notice to the candidate. The Justice writing separately expressed doubt about the standing order’s compliance with the statute but concluded any defect in notice would only require a new hearing, not dismissal. Because LaVelle had, by stipulation, fewer than the 300 valid signatures required for the ballot, the Court affirmed the Commonwealth Court’s order for that independent reason.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reviewed an appeal by Todd Elliot Koger, Sr. challenging a Commonwealth Court order concerning his nomination petition as the Democratic candidate for the 34th Legislative District. After consideration, the Supreme Court entered a per curiam order on April 7, 2026, affirming the Commonwealth Court's March 25, 2026 decision. The Supreme Court did not provide extended opinion or additional reasoning in this short order, simply affirming the lower court's disposition and ending the appeal at the state supreme court level.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of Lavell Tyrone Player’s petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. The resentencing court, after an evidentiary hearing, found beyond a reasonable doubt that Player was the actual killer (and alternatively a major participant acting with reckless indifference), making him ineligible for resentencing. The appellate panel held that a jury’s earlier “not true” findings on a personal firearm enhancement and robbery special circumstance did not collaterally estop the resentencing court from finding Player was the shooter, relying on People v. Santamaria and subsequent authority. The court also found substantial evidence—principally the testimony of accomplice Walter Fonteno and corroborating witnesses—supports the actual-killer finding.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the family court’s orders vacating a default judgment in a marital dissolution case and denying the petitioner’s request for a statement of decision, then remanded for further proceedings. The court held the default judgment exceeded the relief requested in the form petition because the petition left property division items as “to be determined,” so the entry of a default awarding specific property violated the respondent’s due process right to notice. The court also concluded Family Code set-aside provisions and Code of Civil Procedure section 580 both apply, found the record supported mistake/lack of notice, and directed amendment of the petition and an opportunity to answer.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of Pengfei Philip Chi’s petition challenging the DMV’s suspension of his driver’s license after he refused a chemical test following a DUI arrest. Chi argued the DMV hearing officer acted as a prosecutor rather than a neutral adjudicator, violating his due process rights. The appellate court held that the DMV’s post-2022 policy requires hearing officers to act as neutral factfinders who may introduce evidence, ask clarifying questions, and rule on objections, and that combining investigative and adjudicative functions does not, by itself, create an unacceptable risk of bias. Because Chi presented no evidence of a constitutionally intolerable risk of bias, the court affirmed the judgment.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lorain County Common Pleas Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Nancy Vega, holding she is entitled to participate in the Ohio workers’ compensation system. Vega fell at work and injured her shoulder; the court concluded her fall was an “unexplained fall” under Waller v. Mayfield, meaning it arose from a neutral risk tied to the workplace. Because Vega eliminated idiopathic (personal) causes and there was no evidence of a non-employment cause, an inference arose that the injury was work-related. The BWC forfeited its challenge by not participating in initial briefing.

The Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Todd D. Campbell Sr.’s petition for postconviction relief. Campbell, who pleaded guilty in 2022 to aggravated vehicular homicide and OVI, sought to vacate his convictions in a 2025 filing asserting ineffective assistance of counsel, discovery violations, evidence tampering, and competency issues. The trial court found the petition untimely under Ohio R.C. 2953.21 and that Campbell failed to meet the statutory exceptions in R.C. 2953.23, and that his claims were barred by res judicata. The appellate court concluded Campbell did not show error in that ruling and affirmed.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants-appellees and denial of plaintiffs-appellants’ summary judgment in a foreclosure action. Plaintiffs had executed and recorded a quitclaim deed in 2020 conveying the property to defendants and later sued in 2024 claiming an oral land-sale contract and unpaid installments. The court held plaintiffs lacked standing to foreclose because they held no recorded mortgage or lien, and the deed’s recited consideration barred use of prior oral agreements under the parol evidence and merger-by-deed rules. The judgment dismissing the case was affirmed.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Lake County Court of Common Pleas’ grant of summary judgment for defendant-attorney David Patterson in Bruce Arnoff’s legal malpractice suit. Arnoff alleged Patterson’s representation in his federal habeas proceedings breached professional duties and caused dismissal of his habeas petition. The appellate court held there were no genuine issues of material fact: Patterson owed a duty but Arnoff failed to produce expert proof of breach or causation, and the federal petition’s untimeliness preceded Patterson’s retention. The court also rejected claims of improper joinder, discovery abuse, denial of jury trial, and judicial bias.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and 17-month prison sentence of Allen Ochier for felony domestic violence arising from an altercation with his mother. The jury rejected Ochier’s self-defense claim and found prior domestic-violence conduct; the trial court sentenced within the statutory range. On appeal, the court rejected challenges that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, that the prosecutor’s remarks deprived Ochier of a fair trial, that trial counsel was ineffective, and that the sentence was contrary to law. The court found the jury’s credibility determinations reasonable and the sentence supported by the record.

The Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Marion Municipal Court conviction and sentence of Marquis D. Montgomery for telecommunications harassment. Montgomery had been charged after repeatedly sending unwanted texts to the mother of his children and her boyfriend despite warnings from them and police. He represented himself at trial after counsel withdrew, was convicted by a jury, and received community control with jail time. The appeals court rejected claims that the court lacked jurisdiction due to service defects, that the waiver of counsel and standby/hybrid representation were invalid, that evidence was insufficient, and that the court abused its discretion in denying a continuance.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The appellate court affirmed the Illinois Department of Human Services’ decision requiring Kenwood-Oakland Community Organization (KOCO) to repay $451,198 in grant funds. KOCO had challenged IDHS’s recovery determination after administrative and circuit-court review, arguing it properly spent the grants and that IDHS denied due process and changed its basis for recovery. The court held KOCO failed to rebut the statutory presumption favoring recovery because it did not produce adequate accounting records—most critically, KOCO refused to provide its general ledger—so IDHS permissibly sought recovery under the Grant Funds Recovery Act and related regulations.