Court Filings

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s divorce judgment. The court held the prenuptial agreement signed the wedding day was valid because Wife could have postponed the ceremony, had prior divorce experience, made edits to the agreement, and Husband’s testimony about timing and disclosure was credible. The court found most contested assets (proceeds from sale of Husband’s family businesses, silver bars, and funds in several UBS accounts) were Husband’s separate property based on the prenup and an unchallenged forensic accounting. The court awarded time-limited spousal support to Wife and taxed costs to the appellant.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Summit County Common Pleas Court’s denial of Jackie Robinson’s May 2, 2025 filing, which the trial court properly treated as an untimely petition for post-conviction relief. Robinson challenged his 1976 burglary conviction and related sentencing issues, but he filed decades after the statutory window for direct appeal and post-conviction relief had closed. Because he did not show that he was unavoidably prevented from discovering the facts underlying his claims or that a new, retroactive right applied, the court concluded the trial court lacked authority to entertain the petition and therefore denied relief.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed Charles Link’s convictions and sentence for six counts of rape and seven counts of gross sexual imposition (GSI). A jury convicted Link after testimony from two victims, C.D. and K.N., family members who described repeated inappropriate touching and sexual acts occurring over years while in Link’s relatives’ home. Link argued ineffective assistance of counsel, that some convictions should have merged, and that evidence was insufficient as to K.N. The court rejected each argument, finding trial strategy reasonable, separate daytime touching supported GSI distinct from nighttime rapes, and sufficient evidence to convict on the K.N. count.

The Ohio Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Summit County Common Pleas Court’s denial of Chad Jay Cobb’s post-sentence motion to withdraw his 2013 guilty pleas to multiple serious charges, including aggravated murder. Cobb claimed his plea was involuntary because a domestic relations attorney and defense counsel told him he would lose parental rights if the case was not resolved within a year, and he argued ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court found the trial court did not abuse its discretion: the court rejected Cobb’s credibility, noted lack of attorney testimony or affidavits supporting his claims, and emphasized the long delay in seeking relief.

The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s termination of spousal support. Patricia (wife) appealed after the Summit County trial court adopted a magistrate’s decision that ended Richard’s (husband) indefinite spousal support. The appellate court held the divorce decree only reserved the trial court authority to terminate support on death or the wife’s remarriage, and to modify support upon a substantial change in circumstances; it did not reserve authority to terminate support based on a change in circumstances. Because the termination exceeded the decree’s reserved powers, the trial court abused its discretion and the judgment was reversed.

The court dismissed Toledo Hospital’s petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to stop Judge Lori Olender from presiding over a wrongful-death suit filed by the Estate of Yvonne Diller. The hospital argued the common pleas court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the allegedly negligent physician was a state employee and claims against state employees belong in the Court of Claims. The appellate court held R.C. 2743.02 divests jurisdiction over claims against the State but does not strip common pleas courts of jurisdiction over claims against private entities like Toledo Hospital, so the judge did not patently and unambiguously lack jurisdiction. The hospital has an adequate remedy by appeal, so the writ was denied and the petition dismissed.

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s June 16, 2025 judgment denying S.W.’s motion to renew a domestic violence civil protection order (DVCPO) against her ex-spouse, D.R., and dismissing her motion to show cause. The trial court heard testimony about an alleged in-court threat and prior incidents but found S.W. failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that D.R. committed domestic violence or threatened her after the original order. The appeals court upheld that credibility determinations and found the trial court’s decision supported by competent, credible evidence.

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lucas County Domestic Relations Court’s September 17, 2025 judgments. The appeal arose from post-divorce proceedings in which the magistrate and trial court addressed modification of parenting time, contempt findings related to court-ordered counseling, and related motions. The appellate court held it lacked jurisdiction to consider two earlier trial-court orders because Dawn did not timely appeal them, and it lacked a record (transcripts) to review factual challenges. Because Dawn failed to file transcript evidence, the court presumed regularity of the proceedings and found no reversible error, affirming the trial court.

The Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lucas County Common Pleas Court’s denial of Tito Parks’s motion to suppress evidence discovered after a 2024 traffic stop. Parks was stopped for an alleged window-tint violation; during the stop the officer ran Parks’s information and requested a drug-detection canine. Parks refused to exit the vehicle and was arrested for failing to obey police orders; a subsequent search of the vehicle revealed a firearm. The appeals court held the stop was valid, the officer did not unreasonably prolong the detention while awaiting dispatch/computer checks and the K-9, and the search incident to arrest was lawful.

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Sandusky County Common Pleas Court judgment convicting James R. Baker, Jr. of multiple offenses arising from a head-on crash on September 4, 2022. The panel rejected Baker’s challenges to the weight of the evidence, denial of his motion to suppress hospital-drawn blood and related test results, denial of his recusal motion, and ineffective assistance claims. The court found credible testimony that Baker operated the truck while intoxicated, that hospital and crime-lab blood testing complied with statutory and administrative requirements, and that Baker failed to show judicial bias or counsel deficiency that would require reversal.

The Ohio Court of Appeals dismissed Michael-Rashaad Williamson’s original action seeking a writ of prohibition against the City of Toledo, its police department, the Toledo Municipal Court prosecutor, and an IRS commissioner. The court explained that a writ of prohibition may only be issued against persons exercising judicial or quasi-judicial power, and prosecutors and police do not qualify. Because the named respondents do not exercise the required judicial authority and the complaint sought dismissal and expungement of a pending criminal case, the relator cannot prevail and the writ was denied as a matter of law.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Licking County Common Pleas judgment convicting Kortlan J. Hess of multiple drug and weapons offenses after he pleaded guilty. The trial court imposed an aggregate 15-to-19 year prison term, ordering certain sentences consecutive. On appeal Hess argued the court plainly erred in imposing consecutive sentences because the statutory findings were unsupported. The appeals court held the record — including the sealed presentence investigation and the court's on-the-record statements about Hess’s extensive criminal history and that offenses occurred while he was under supervision — supported the consecutive-sentence findings, so the judgment was affirmed.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's sentence of an aggregate 108-month prison term (three consecutive 36-month terms for third-degree felonies, plus concurrent misdemeanor jail terms) imposed after Alberta Grant pleaded guilty. The court reviewed whether the consecutive and maximum sentences were supported by the record and applicable Ohio sentencing statutes. It concluded the trial court complied with R.C. 2929.11, 2929.12, and 2929.14(C)(4), made the required findings at the sentencing hearing, incorporated them into the entry, and the record contains evidence supporting those findings.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed Jason Tate's conviction and sentence after he pleaded no contest to multiple drug and weapons charges. Tate argued his trial counsel was ineffective for pursuing a meritless suppression motion, misapplying discovery rules which he says led to withdrawal of a 20-year plea offer, and failing to advise acceptance of that plea. The appellate court found the suppression motion was a reasonable tactical effort despite failing, and that Tate failed to show prejudice from any alleged discovery error or that the trial court would have accepted a plea producing a lesser sentence. The conviction and sentence were affirmed.

The Tenth District Court of Appeals reviewed a dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) of a 2022 product-liability complaint by Robyn Sattelmyer, who alleged an Argyle Infant Heel Warmer exploded when she squeezed it at work in December 2020. The appeals court held that her claims for manufacturing defect (R.C. 2307.74) and design defect (R.C. 2307.75) were pleaded with sufficient factual detail—including attached FDA recall notices and photos—to survive a motion to dismiss and therefore reversed as to those claims against Covidien, Cardinal Health, and John Doe Corporations 1-5. The court affirmed dismissal of claims for failure to conform to representations (R.C. 2307.77) and for inadequate warning (R.C. 2307.76) because the complaint did not plead express representations or factual allegations about warnings, and it remanded for further proceedings.

The Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Franklin County Common Pleas Court’s conclusion that R.C. 5703.38 bars common pleas courts from issuing orders that suspend or stay Department of Taxation actions. Toledo sued to stop the state from enforcing R.C. 5747.502 (the spending setoff) for the period a prior injunction had been in place and sought restoration of withheld local government funds. The appeals court held that R.C. 5703.38 removes subject-matter jurisdiction over Toledo’s requested injunctive and declaratory relief and therefore dismissed the action (modifying the lower court’s entry to reflect dismissal rather than judgment on the merits).

The Ohio Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed Charles E. Brown’s conviction for having weapons while under disability and an accompanying firearm specification after a jury trial. Brown argued (1) a municipal-court complaint was defective under Crim.R. 3(A) and deprived the common pleas court of jurisdiction, and (2) his statutory and constitutional speedy-trial rights were violated. The court held the municipal complaint’s purported defect was irrelevant because Brown was tried on a grand jury indictment, and after counting tolled and waived periods the court found fewer than the statutory speedy-trial days elapsed and no constitutional violation under the Barker factors.

The court dismissed Abdikadir Abukar’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the municipal court’s March 25, 2025 sentencing entry did not satisfy the requirements for a final, appealable criminal judgment. Although a March 21, 2025 entry recorded the jury verdict and identified the offense and statute, the March 25 sentencing entry failed to state the fact of conviction (the name of the offense and statute) as required by Crim.R. 32(C). Because a single journalized entry must contain the required elements to create a final order, the court could not reach the assigned errors and dismissed the appeal as premature.

The Tenth District Court of Appeals denied Ramone Wright’s request for a writ of mandamus seeking reversal of an indictment in Franklin County Common Pleas case No. 09CR-3758. The court adopted the magistrate’s decision and granted the municipal court respondent’s motion to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(6). The dismissal was based on procedural defects: Wright failed to submit a notarized affidavit of prior civil filings as required by R.C. 2969.25(A) and the affidavit he did file omitted multiple civil actions and appeals from the prior five years. Because compliance with R.C. 2969.25 is mandatory, the petition was dismissed without reaching the merits.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed Brian Conley Barnett's convictions for involuntary manslaughter (two counts) and trafficking in fentanyl. Barnett argued the jury verdict form for one manslaughter count showed only the penalty provision and therefore required reduction to a lesser degree, and that his manslaughter and trafficking convictions should have merged for sentencing. The court held that the felony-versus-misdemeanor distinction in the involuntary-manslaughter statute creates distinct offenses (so the verdict form error did not trigger automatic reduction) and that trafficking (harm to the public) and manslaughter (harm to particular victims) involve separate victims and do not merge. The convictions and aggregate sentence were affirmed.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s denial of summary judgment to three Medina police officers and remanded for further proceedings. The officers had been sued personally after entering Renee Johnson’s apartment following a disturbance report and concerns about Johnson’s mental health; the trial court denied immunity and applied a four-year statute of limitations. The appellate court held the trial court failed to analyze immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) separately for each officer and provided no reasoning on whether exceptions to immunity applied, so the matter is reversed and remanded for the trial court to make the required, officer-specific immunity findings.

Relator Heather Hill sought a writ of mandamus to compel Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose to accept her replacement lieutenant-governor candidate after her running mate withdrew 13 days before the May 5, 2026 primary. The court dismissed the mandamus claim because R.C. 3513.311(C) expressly permits replacement only when the lieutenant-governor candidate dies within the specified window, not when the candidate withdraws. The court also dismissed Hill’s requests for a declaratory judgment and a prohibitory injunction for lack of this court’s original jurisdiction over those remedies. Hill’s emergency motion was denied.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Logan County Common Pleas Court. Holley Tolliver was convicted after a jury trial of burglary, grand theft of firearms, multiple counts of improperly discharging a firearm into habitations, and multiple counts of felonious assault arising from an extended standoff in which he fired into neighboring homes and at law enforcement. The trial court denied an insanity instruction because expert and trial testimony did not show Tolliver lacked knowledge of the wrongfulness of his acts, and the court’s lengthy consecutive and specification sentences were supported by the record given the scope, planning, and danger of Tolliver’s conduct.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the Seneca County Common Pleas Court judgment convicting Rhonda A. Huffman for inducing panic after notes threatening violence were found in a school hallway. The court held that circumstantial evidence — including security-camera footage showing Huffman entering the short hallway carrying papers and being the only adult there shortly before the notes were discovered — supported the conviction. The court rejected claims of insufficient evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and improper opinion testimony by a police detective, finding any challenged testimony was not prejudicial or preserved for review.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Union County Common Pleas Court’s judgment convicting Terrence T. Favorite following guilty pleas to drug-trafficking offenses and sentencing to a 59-month aggregate prison term. Favorite argued his pleas were not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent because he believed he would receive community control, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for not ensuring he understood the consequences. The appellate court found the record showed adequate Crim.R. 11 colloquy and that Favorite was repeatedly informed he could receive prison terms and acknowledged understanding, so neither claim succeeded.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Crawford County Common Pleas Court's judgment. James J. Bernard was indicted in 2018, but not served until 2024. He filed a statutory notice of imprisonment and a motion to dismiss for undue delay; the trial court denied dismissal. Bernard later pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to a single amended theft count and appealed the denial of his motion claiming a violation of his right to a speedy trial. The appellate court held Bernard waived the speedy-trial claim by pleading guilty and, alternatively, applied the Barker factors and found no constitutional violation.

The Ohio appellate court affirmed the juvenile court’s July 21, 2025 order granting permanent custody of infant C.C. to the Defiance-Paulding Department of Job and Family Services. The child was placed in the agency’s temporary custody shortly after birth in June 2023 because both parents were incarcerated. After nearly two years in foster care, the agency sought permanent custody. The court found the child had been in temporary custody for 12 of the prior 22 months, the parents (particularly the mother) failed to complete case-plan goals, and the child’s best interests favored permanency with the foster family.

The Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Marion County Common Pleas Court’s dismissal of inmate Joshua Fikes’ Consumer Sales Practices Act claim against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction (ODRC) and JPay, LLC. Fikes alleged he was promised he could keep a JPay tablet purchased in 2014 and later lost value when ODRC phased out JPay devices; he sued seeking treble economic damages and emotional damages. The appellate court held the complaint was time-barred under the CSPA’s two-year limitations period and that equitable tolling did not apply given the speculative allegations about prison mail handling, so dismissal was proper.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the Shelby County Common Pleas Court’s grant of a domestic violence civil protection order (DVCPO) in favor of petitioner Jamie Chambers against respondent Matthew Chambers. The DVCPO followed a full hearing at which Jamie testified to multiple incidents of physical abuse, threats including possession of a gun, and post-separation stalking; a corroborating witness (Matthew’s sister-in-law) also testified. The magistrate credited Jamie’s testimony, and the trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision. The appeals court held there was competent, credible evidence to support the DVCPO and rejected challenges about excluded post-hearing exhibits and sufficiency of corroborating records.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's denial of summary judgment to three Medina police officers and remanded for further proceedings. The officers had been sued by Renee Johnson after they entered her apartment following a disturbance call and reports that Johnson might harm herself. The appeals court held the trial court failed to analyze statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) as to each officer individually and did not explain why exceptions to immunity applied. Because the trial court gave no immunity analysis, the appeals court reversed and remanded for proper findings.