Case law

State v. Filiaggi

86 Ohio St. 3d 230 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 28, 1999

The trial panel clearly expressed what its responsibilities were regarding the findings it needed to make. … We conclude that the evidence clearly showed that defendant did not suffer from any mental diseases that would qualify for the insanity defense under Ohio law and that the defendant knew the

State v. Johnston

39 Ohio St. 3d 48 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1988

Furthermore, we see no profit in requiring appellee to have filed two separate motions where one was clearly sufficient. … He further indicated he could not establish his whereabouts on October 4, 1982.

Columbus Bar Assn. v. Winkfield (Slip Opinion)

2019 Ohio 4532 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 6, 2019

We agree with the board that Winkfield failed to establish that the actions of relator or the alleged inaction of Winkfield’s former monitors somehow absolve him of responsibility or amount to mitigating evidence in this … In addition, unlike the attorneys in most of the cases cited in the board’s report, Winkfield has not presented any qualifying mitigating evidence to weigh in favor of a lesser sanction.

State v. Hochhausler

76 Ohio St. 3d 455 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1996

Moreover, challenged legislation will not be invalidated unless the challenger establishes the unconstitutional nature of the statute beyond a reasonable doubt. Hilton v. … The Matthews Test Applied Private Interest {¶ 34} Clearly, there is a substantial interest in the possession and use of a vehicle.

Pusey v. Bator

94 Ohio St. 3d 275 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 27, 2002

The court rejected Pusey’s assertion that the nature of the work contracted for in this case qualified as an exception to the general rule. {¶ 14} Pusey appealed the trial court’s decision to the Seventh District … Id. at paragraph two of the syllabus. {¶ 18} We find that, even when viewed in the light most favorable to Pusey, the evidence clearly established YSP’s status as an independent contractor.

Wightman v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

86 Ohio St. 3d 431 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1999

Berg did not qualify as an expert under Evid.R. 702. … The majority clearly set forth the shortcomings of Conrail 25  SUPREME COURT OF OHIO in this matter.

State v. Hand

107 Ohio St. 3d 378 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 18, 2006

Hand’s admissions to Grimes clearly established that one of Hand’s purposes was to eliminate Welch as a potential witness. {¶ 91} Finally, Hand argues that the trial court erred in admitting Welch’s statements because they … statement.” {¶ 97} Welch’s statements admitting his involvement in murdering Hand’s wives qualified for admissibility under Evid.R. 804(B)(3).

In re D.R.

2022 Ohio 4493 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 16, 2022

Therefore, I respectfully dissent. {¶ 37} The United States Supreme Court has clearly stated that “[p]rocess is not an end in itself” and that procedural due process serves “to protect a substantive interest to which … concurring opinion elaborated on the confusion in our prior case law, explaining that a “challenge to a generalized legislative determination—for example, that all juveniles of a certain age who are charged with certain qualifying

State v. Tibbetts

92 Ohio St. 3d 146 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 5, 2001

First, circumstantial evidence established Tibbetts’s identity as the killer. … Glen Weaver, examined Tibbetts on three separate occasions prior to trial and believed that Tibbetts would not have qualified for the insanity plea.

Scofield v. Railway Co.

43 Ohio St. (N.S.) 571 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1885

It can not be done except by the clearly expressed will of the legislative power. . . . … Its road, though owned by the corporation, was nevertheless constructed for public uses, and is, in a qualified sense, a public highway.

Cleveland Botanical Garden v. Worthington Drewien

171 Ohio St. 3d 109 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 20, 2022

In my view, a plain reading of the deed establishes that the current use of the property does not violate its terms. … 17  SUPREME COURT OF OHIO Context establishes that he meant the latter.

State v. Madison (Slip Opinion)

160 Ohio St. 3d 232 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 21, 2020

Religious-Freedom Claims {¶ 94} In his fourth proposition of law, Madison contends that the practice of death-qualifying juries violates the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment by excluding … To prevail, he must show that an error occurred, that the error was plain, and that but for the error the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise. State v.

State v. Leonard

104 Ohio St. 3d 54 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2004

The extent and scope of cross-examination clearly fall within the ambit of trial strategy, and debatable trial tactics do not establish ineffective assistance of counsel. See State v. … Leonard indicated that if he “had been thinking clearly, this would not have happened.”

Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Whipple (Slip Opinion)

168 Ohio St. 3d 101 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 24, 2022

. {¶ 9} Whipple submitted documents to defendants’ counsel in an effort to comply with the court’s order, but Synenberg maintained that they were insufficient to establish Kristina’s mental capacity. … lawyer is impaired by drugs or alcohol or by a mental, emotional, or physical condition, to take appropriate action, which may include a confidential referral to a lawyer-assistance program) and R.C. 2305.28(D) (providing a qualified

State v. Elmore

111 Ohio St. 3d 515 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2006

Even if trial counsel’s questioning reflected deficient performance, Elmore fails to establish prejudice under the Strickland test. … the time of the offense); (B)(5) (lack of a significant criminal record); and (B)(6) (accomplice only). {¶ 164} We find that Elmore’s intellectual deficiencies, longstanding depression, and mild brain impairment do not qualify

State v. Wilson

74 Ohio St. 3d 381 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1996

Thus, we find Wilson’s ninth proposition of law lacks merit.1 {¶ 41} In his eleventh proposition of law, Wilson contends that the trial court improperly used the Wainwright constitutional standard to death-qualify … Woodard (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 70, 73, 623 N.E.2d 75, 78. {¶ 49} DeBolt’s testimony was clearly admissible.

State v. Soto (Slip Opinion)

2019 Ohio 4430 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2019

Other courts have held there must be a judgment or sentence before a guilty plea may qualify as a conviction for purposes of double jeopardy. See, e.g., State v. Stone, 400 P.3d 692, ¶ 25 (Mt.2017). … In determining that C.K. could not establish he was a wrongfully imprisoned individual pursuant to the statute, this court recognized that a reversal of a conviction as against the manifest weight of the evidence does not

State v. Adams

103 Ohio St. 3d 508 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 17, 2004

Nonetheless, we find that Adams has not established deficient performance. … Each expert was qualified under Evid.R. 702, and each explained the scientific procedures used.

Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Cleary

93 Ohio St. 3d 191 · Ohio Supreme Court · Sep 19, 2001

Cleary argues that none of her acts following Judge Greene’s order qualifies under this standard. … Under this stringent standard, the relator must produce sufficient evidence to establish in the mind of the trier of fact a “firm belief or conviction of the facts sought to be established.” Cross v.

State v. Jones

90 Ohio St. 3d 403 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 26, 2000

McDonough does not specialize in infectious diseases, his expertise in the area of clenched-fist or bite injuries to hands made him well qualified to testify on this subject. … Stokes used State Exhibit 6, a walkie-talkie available to appellant while he was working at the hotel, to help establish the scale of the wounds on the autopsy photo.