Court Filings

The court reversed the trial court’s denial of Solomon Lewis’s timely petition for postconviction relief because the lower court failed to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Ohio law. Lewis had pleaded guilty and was sentenced; after a prior direct-appeal remand and resentencing he filed timely postconviction petitions. The trial court denied relief in a one-sentence entry without explaining the bases for the decision. The appellate court held that such an entry is insufficient under R.C. 2953.21(H) and remanded for the trial court to issue proper findings and conclusions.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for defendant-appellant J.P.S. Properties Diversified, Inc. The dispute involved whether a deed use restriction barred an Amazon fulfillment center and whether that restriction was enforceable. A prior appellate decision (Jay Realty I) had already concluded the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Jay Realty and that the restriction was enforceable and ran with the land. The trial court improperly reinstated its prior summary-judgment entry contrary to the appellate mandate; the appeals court ordered entry of judgment for JPS because no claims remained pending after the earlier opinion.

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.

The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s decision denying the father’s motion to modify parental rights and granting in part the mother’s modification requests. The dispute involved a 2016 parenting agreement naming mother residential custodian and the child’s wishes to live with father and play football at a different high school. The trial court found no material change in circumstances to justify changing custody to father but modified certain logistical terms (travel notice, single phone, sharing activity costs) as in the child’s best interest. The court also properly handled the guardian ad litem (GAL) report and fee requests.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals reviewed two Parma Municipal Court matters involving Michael C. Dunn. One case (drug charges) resulted in acquittal at trial, so the appeal is dismissed as moot. The court affirmed Dunn’s convictions for multiple traffic violations in the related traffic case. The appellate court held the municipal court had personal jurisdiction over Dunn because he was arrested, arraigned, and voluntarily continued to participate in proceedings, and it had subject-matter jurisdiction because the alleged infractions occurred in Broadview Heights and the traffic ticket satisfied rule requirements.

The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for Apex Security Group, Inc. in a negligence suit by pro se plaintiff Joshua Bradley, Sr., who was punched at a Cleveland Browns game. The court concluded Apex did not owe Bradley a duty to prevent the unforeseeable assault under the contract and Ohio law governing private security duties, and Bradley failed to show a genuine issue of material fact. The court also rejected Bradley’s procedural and bias claims, found no abuse in evidence rulings or refusal to grant default judgment, and affirmed the judgment for Apex.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s post-trial rulings in a fraudulent-transfer suit brought by Raida Allan against her ex-husband Tareq, his brother Qais, and two corporate gas-station entities. A jury found the transfers occurred, were not in good faith, and awarded Raida damages, but the trial court entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) for Qais and the Gas Stations on statute-of-limitations grounds and denied JNOV as to Tareq. The appellate court held the trial court improperly weighed evidence when granting JNOV, found the jury’s verdict legally supported, reversed those rulings, and remanded for the trial court to enter judgment consistent with the jury and determine damages against Tareq.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed most rulings in State v. Craft but reversed and remanded limited parts of the sentence. Ervin Tyrone Craft challenged speedy-trial computations, denial of his motion to suppress after a K-9 alerted to drugs during a traffic stop, and the validity of his no-contest plea. The court rejected his speedy-trial and suppression claims and found the plea valid because the record shows Craft understood the plea's consequences. However, the court found plain error at sentencing: the trial court merged two allied first-degree-felony counts but imposed a five-year sentence on each. The appeals court reversed the sentence and remanded for limited resentencing so the state may elect one merged count for sentencing.

The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed Warren D. Bartos’s convictions and sentence after he pled guilty to trespass in a habitation, possession of a fentanyl-related compound, aggravated possession of methamphetamine, and resisting arrest. The trial court accepted Bartos’s guilty pleas after a proper on-the-record colloquy and written plea form, and imposed the parties’ joint recommendation of one year of community control. Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief saying no non-frivolous issues exist; the appeals court independently reviewed the record, found the plea and sentence lawful, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed the judgment.

The Ohio Supreme Court denied a mandamus petition by Jocelyn Rosnick (ACLU of Ohio) seeking contracts and related documents the Geauga County Sheriff’s Office allegedly executed with DHS, ICE, or the U.S. Marshals Service between June 1, 2024 and March 3, 2025. The sheriff’s office initially cited federal-law restrictions for denial but later submitted a records-clerk affidavit stating it did not execute any such contracts during that period. Because Rosnick failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that responsive records exist and were withheld, the court denied the writ and denied statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs. A motion to file late rebuttal evidence was also denied as untimely.

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Seventh District’s judgment holding that a 1953 deed reservation of “all the coal below the horizon of the No. 8 coal . . . and other minerals, with the right to mine and remove such coal or other minerals of any vein” did not reserve rights to oil and gas. The trial court had granted summary judgment to the surface owner (Faith Ranch) and the court of appeals affirmed based on extrinsic evidence; the Supreme Court agreed the outcome was correct but held the deed was unambiguous on its face. The Court explained that the reservation’s words (mine/mining, vein, and related phrasing) show an intent to reserve solid, mineable minerals like coal, not migratory oil and gas.

The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a disciplinary complaint against Judge John W. Rudduck arising from his personal Facebook activity endorsing his son’s campaign and defending him online. The Board of Professional Conduct had found violations of several judicial-conduct rules and recommended a public reprimand, but the Court held that Jud.Cond.R. 4.1(A)(3) — the rule prohibiting judges from publicly endorsing candidates for other offices — is a content-based restriction on political speech that fails strict scrutiny and therefore violates the First Amendment. Because the finding under Jud.Cond.R. 1.2 relied on the invalidated rule, and the Court also found no violation of Jud.Cond.R. 1.3, the complaint was dismissed.

The First District Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded defendant Derrick J. Wilson’s convictions for multiple counts of rape and gross sexual imposition arising from allegations by his stepdaughter. The court upheld the convictions and most evidentiary rulings (including Mayerson Center and therapist testimony under the medical-diagnosis exception) but found sentencing error: the trial court failed to make the statutory findings required for consecutive sentences. The court vacated the consecutive nature of the sentence and remanded for resentencing limited to the consecutive-sentence findings.

The court reviewed an appeal by Rialto on Hurstbourne, LLC against US LBM Operating Co. after the trial court granted summary judgment to US LBM and denied Rialto’s motion. The appellate court held that genuine factual disputes exist about whether the ExtremeGreen flooring component breached express warranties of merchantability and fitness for its intended use (based on acoustical testing and expert reports), so summary judgment on those claims was improper. The court affirmed summary judgment for US LBM on Rialto’s design-defect warranty and on indemnity for interparty attorney fees, and remanded the case for further proceedings on the remaining warranty claims.

The Ohio Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed Jerry Ray Blevins’s convictions for fourth-degree and second-degree aggravated trafficking in methamphetamine after a jury trial, finding the record contained substantial, credible evidence to support the verdicts despite the confidential informant’s criminal history and incentives. However, the court reversed and remanded the postrelease-control portion of the sentence because the trial court failed to orally advise Blevins at sentencing whether postrelease control was discretionary or mandatory and the consequences for violating it, as required by statute. The remainder of the sentence was left intact.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Summit County Common Pleas Court’s order enforcing a settlement between Randy Dean and Pekin Insurance. Dean had sued for underinsured motorist benefits; his former attorney demanded $185,000 and Pekin accepted. Pekin sent settlement documents and a check, but Dean refused to sign. After a hearing with testimony and an email exhibit, the trial court found a valid settlement existed, that Dean’s counsel had authority to settle above $175,000, and that Dean failed to prove incompetence or duress. The appellate court found sufficient evidence supported those findings and affirmed.

The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Highland County Juvenile Court’s decision denying Derrick Beverly’s objections to an administrative order terminating his child support obligation after the child reached majority. Beverly argued the original 2007 support order was void due to fraudulent or misidentified genetic testing, coercion, lack of notice, and other constitutional defects. The appellate court found Beverly failed to timely object to the original administrative orders and that the juvenile court held multiple hearings and considered his submissions. Because Beverly did not show reversible error or lack of opportunity to be heard, the appeals court affirmed.

Kent Elastomer sought a refund of its 2018 workers’ compensation premium under the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation’s group-retrospective-rating program. The bureau denied the request because it had already issued a one-time COVID-19 dividend equal to 100% of each employer’s 2018 premium. The Tenth District issued a limited writ compelling the bureau to administer the group-retro program calculations for the 2018 policy year. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed, holding the bureau must follow the administrative rule governing the group-retro program and could not suspend those duties merely by issuing the dividend.

The Ohio Supreme Court denied as moot Joshua D. Cook’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking surveillance video from Chillicothe Correctional Institution because the records custodian, Natalie Magee, provided access to the requested footage and mailed a DVD copy to an agent designated by Cook. The court also denied Cook’s request for statutory damages because Magee offered him the opportunity to view the footage on the same day he filed the mandamus action, and Cook did not provide evidence the mailed DVD was corrupted. The court concluded no outstanding record remained to compel.

The Ohio Supreme Court held that the State and its municipalities may immediately appeal a trial court order that preliminarily enjoins enforcement of a duly enacted law. The City of Columbus passed two firearm ordinances; plaintiffs obtained a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of several provisions. The Fifth District dismissed the city’s interlocutory appeal for lack of a final appealable order. The Supreme Court reversed, reasoning that an injunction preventing enforcement of a law inflicts irreparable sovereign injury and therefore qualifies as a final, immediately appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4). The case was remanded for consideration of the appeal on the merits.