State v. DiTomaso

[Cite as State v. DiTomaso, 2026-Ohio-1330.]


                   IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
                    ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                           PORTAGE COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO,                                   CASE NO. 2025-P-0048

                 Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                                 Criminal Appeal from the
        - vs -                                   Court of Common Pleas

ALBERT C. DITOMASO,
                                                 Trial Court No. 2024 CR 00411
                 Defendant-Appellant.


               MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

                                      Decided: April 13, 2026
                                    Judgment: Appeal dismissed


Connie J. Lewandowski, Portage County Prosecutor, and Vincent V. Vigluicci, Assistant
Prosecutor, 241 South Chestnut Street, Ravenna, OH 44266 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Wesley C. Buchanan, 50 South Main Street, Suite 625, Akron, OH 44308 (For
Defendant-Appellant).


SCOTT LYNCH, J.

        {¶1}     On July 21, 2025, defendant-appellant, Albert DiTomaso, filed a notice of

appeal from the judgment of the Portage County Court of Common Pleas, sentencing him

for multiple criminal offenses following convictions after a jury trial. We dismiss the appeal

due to the lack of a final, appealable order.

        {¶2}     Pursuant to Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section 3(B)(2), a trial court’s

judgment can be immediately reviewed by an appellate court only if it constitutes a “‘final

order’ in the action.” Germ v. Fuerst, 2003-Ohio-6241, ¶ 3 (11th Dist.). “In the absence

of a final, appealable order, an appellate court does not have jurisdiction to review the
matter and must dismiss the appeal.” State v. Parks, 2023-Ohio-3310, ¶ 5 (11th Dist.).

       {¶3}   “A judgment of conviction is a final order subject to appeal under R.C.

2505.02 when it sets forth (1) the fact of the conviction, (2) the sentence, (3) the judge’s

signature, and (4) the time stamp indicating the entry upon the journal by the clerk.” State

v. Lester, 2011-Ohio-5204, paragraph one of the syllabus. However, “all counts of an

indictment must be resolved before a judgment entry of conviction may become a final,

appealable order.” State v. Craig, 2020-Ohio-455, ¶ 15 and 21 (“a conviction on one

count of a multicount indictment is not a final, appealable order when other counts remain

pending. . .”). “Where a charge that does not terminate in a conviction is not disposed of

upon conviction of other offenses and has not otherwise ‘been terminated by a journal

entry,’ this is considered a ‘hanging charge’ which ‘prevent[s] the conviction from being a

final order under R.C. 2505.02(B).’” State v. Mahr, 2018-Ohio-3443, ¶ 10 (11th Dist.),

citing State v. Mullens, 2018-Ohio-1594, ¶ 11 (4th Dist.).

       {¶4}   On May 17, 2024, DiTomaso was indicted by the Portage County Grand

Jury for two counts of Aggravated Vehicular Homicide (Counts One and Two), felonies of

the second and third degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.06; Aggravated Vehicular Assault

(Count Three), a felony of the third degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.08; Vehicular Assault

(Count Four), a felony of the fourth degree, in violation of R.C. 2903.08; three counts of

Operating a Vehicle While Under the Influence (Counts Five through Seven),

misdemeanors of the first degree in violation of R.C. 4511.19; and Assured Cleared

Distance (Count Eight), a minor misdemeanor, in violation of R.C. 4511.21.

       {¶5}   At the April 29-May 1, 2025 trial, the jury was instructed on six of these eight

counts and given jury forms for six counts. It returned guilty verdicts for each of the six



                                        PAGE 2 OF 4

Case No. 2025-P-0048
counts: two counts of Aggravated Vehicular Homicide, Aggravated Vehicular Assault,

Vehicular Assault, and two counts of OVI. Pursuant to the jury instructions, the two OVI

counts were for operating a vehicle while having a specified concentration of blood in the

alcohol and urine, Counts Six and Seven of the Indictment.                          The court’s entry

memorializing the verdict and sentencing entry referenced convictions and sentences

only for those six counts.1 The charges of OVI for operating a vehicle “while the person

was under the influence of alcohol” (Count Five in the Indictment) and Assured Cleared

Distance were not placed before the jury nor mentioned in any entry issued by the court.

A thorough review of the record and the transcript reveals no disposition of these charges.

At a pretrial hearing on April 16, 2025, less than two weeks prior to trial, DiTomaso

referenced the eight-count indictment and nothing in the record indicates why only six

counts were tried to the jury.

        {¶6}    In the absence of a judgment dismissing or otherwise resolving two counts

of the indictment, we lack jurisdiction to address this appeal. See State v. Perrill, 2026-

Ohio-218, ¶ 27 (4th Dist.) (“[d]espite a thorough review of the record, we cannot find any

indication that the fourth count . . . was dismissed, nollied, or otherwise resolved” and

thus, there is no final appealable order). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby sua sponte

dismissed for lack of a final appealable order.



EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.,

ROBERT J. PATTON, J.,

concur.

1. The lower court’s entries reference DiTomaso being convicted of Counts Five and Six in the Indictment.
However, a review of the instructions given to the jury on the OVI offenses indicates that the OVI offenses
for which DiTomaso was convicted were Counts Six and Seven in the Indictment.

                                              PAGE 3 OF 4

Case No. 2025-P-0048
                               JUDGMENT ENTRY



       For the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of this court, this appeal is

hereby sua sponte dismissed for lack a final appealable order.

       Costs to be taxed against appellant.




                                                JUDGE SCOTT LYNCH



                                              JUDGE EUGENE A. LUCCI,
                                                     concurs



                                              JUDGE ROBERT J. PATTON,
                                                      concurs


           THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY

    A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate
              pursuant to Rule 27 of the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure.




                                      PAGE 4 OF 4

Case No. 2025-P-0048