Case law

State v. Piert, Unpublished Decision (12-19-2003)

2003 Ohio 6973 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2003

Piert does not have any documented mental illness; however, he does qualify currently for Pedophilia, nonexclusive type, sexually attracted to females. * * * Mr. … Clear and convincing evidence is that measure or proof "which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established." Cross v.

State v. Carey, 2008-Ca-20 (1-7-2009)

2009 Ohio 103 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 7, 2009

234 , 700 P.2d 630 , 634 (young children are not "governed by the clock and calendar as *Page 8 adults are" and allowances must be made for the inexactitude of children's memories, or else the defendant becomes virtually immune … "thirteenth juror" and in reviewing the entire record, "weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses, and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly

In re A.W.

2017 Ohio 7786 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 2017

Clear and convincing evidence is that which will “produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established.” … The caseworker testified that Mother had qualified for food stamps, but she let that benefit lapse.

State v. Flanigan, 21460 (6-22-2007)

2007 Ohio 3158 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 22, 2007

The state argues that the photographs' probative value in establishing cause of death outweighed their potentially prejudicial effect. … Contrastingly, the decision as to which of several competing inferences, suggested by the evidence in the record, should be preferred, is a matter in which an appellate judge *Page 23 is at least equally qualified, by reason

Smith v. Jones

175 Ohio App. 3d 705 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 2007

Our role is only to determine whether the current method chosen by the legislature is clearly unconstitutional. Desenco, Inc. v. … Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same, whenever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted

Castello v. Castello

2023 Ohio 4586 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2023

Upon review of the record, Husband has not established that the trial court incorrectly failed to deduct the child’s insurance costs from Husband’s income because there was no testimony or other evidence establishing the … He, therefore, has not established that the court was required to admit them. {¶26} Regarding contempt, Husband alleges that the trial court made him bear the costs associated with preparing qualified domestic

Hunley v. Hunley

2020 Ohio 5053 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2020

degree of the other party; (k) The time and expense necessary for the spouse who is seeking spousal support to acquire education, training, or job experience so that the spouse will be qualified … Clearly, it is improper for counsel to advance arguments in closing that are not supported by the evidence. Premier Therapy, LLC. v. Childs, 7th Dist. Columbiana Nos. 14 CO 008 and 15 CO 0028, 2016-Ohio-7934, ¶ 154.

State v. Nelson-Vaughn

2016 Ohio 1426 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 2016

An alleged error “does not constitute a plain error ... unless, but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. … The officer's expertise was not of a nature hidden from lay understanding. {¶41} Evid.R. 701 and 704 qualify the officer's testimony as lay opinion.

State v. Rogers, Unpublished Decision (4-27-1999)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 27, 1999

Appellant claims Detective Hartmeyer was merely an evidence technician and therefore, was not qualified to conduct tests or interpret test results. … Appellant further notes the prosecution did not qualify Detective Hartmeyer as an expert witness under Evid.R. 702.

State v. Biven

2019 Ohio 2551 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 24, 2019

Bobby stated that he could not clearly recall what happened next other than rocks were thrown and dirt rake was swung around by someone. (T. at 201). … ’s vaginal area with his hand, and 3) performed oral sex on the victim. {¶43} Initially, we note that this Court, as well as other Ohio Courts of Appeals, have held that sleep qualifies as a mental impairment under

State v. Hart

2017 Ohio 4079 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 31, 2017

Thus, the defendant could not reasonably have expected the partially hidden contraband to be immune from being viewed from the air. … Furthermore, it is well established that the trial court is in the best position to determine the credibility of witnesses. See, e.g., In re Brown, 9th Dist. No. 21004, 2002–Ohio–3405, ¶ 9, citing State v.

Martin v. Grange Mutual Insurance

143 Ohio App. 3d 332 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 2001

Having said that, however, we wish to qualify our previous pronouncement by stating that even though an insurance company does not have a legal obligation to keep policyholders informed, circumstances may occur whereby an … A policyholder arguing that an insurer has violated this duty would clearly have to provide evidence that not only did the company fail to do so this time, but also that it was the insurer’s practice in the past to provide

State v. Mosley

2020 Ohio 5047 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2020

He claims that, at best, the State proved he had two prior, qualifying convictions. … Because both decisions were matters of trial strategy, they do not establish ineffective assistance of counsel.

Lentz v. Schnippel

71 Ohio App. 3d 206 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 26, 1991

Without reaching a decision on this, we note that a reading of R.C. 4735.21 together with R.C. 4735.16(C) does not clearly reveal that such proof is required. … In that case the defendant appealed from a bench trial judgment on the basis that plaintiff had not established that he was a licensed broker at the time of the transaction.

Landis v. Landis

2020 Ohio 6768 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2020

Clearly, the trial court did not err in attributing some of that debt to the business. … Murray, 128 Ohio App.3d 662, 671, 716 N.E.2d 288 (12th Dist.1999). {¶ 46} The evidence adduced at the hearing established that Audrea earned a yearly salary of $34,000.

Nemitz v. Nemitz

2019 Ohio 306 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 1, 2019

Nemitz originally filed a motion to terminate rather than to modify the shared parenting plan, a review of the transcript clearly demonstrates that both parties sought a modification of Mr. Nemitz’s parenting time. … The parties agree to offset the balance so that only one Qualified Domestic Relations Order is necessary.

State v. Mohamed

2025 Ohio 659 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2025

failure to provide discovery within its “soft deadline,” and both parties were involved in the setting of the continuance, the trial court erred by failing to hold that the continuance between April 3, 2023 and May 18, 2023 qualified … Indeed, the delay was clearly allowable under both subsections of the statute. {¶ 15} Certainly, we do not mean to suggest that the proposed 11 month delay in obtaining the initial DNA results would have been reasonable—it

State v. Jackson

2015 Ohio 6 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 5, 2015

In its response, appellee argued that appellant’s motion for new trial was untimely under Crim.R. 33(B) because the “transcripts presented do not qualify as ‘newly discovered evidence’ in Defendant’s trial.” … The record establishes that the same improper drafting procedures involving the sentencing entry which occurred in Roberts’ case took place in this case as well.

West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.

54 Ohio App. 369 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 1936

The widow was named as executrix, without bond, qualified as such in the Probate Court of Cuyahoga County paid all the debts of the estate and the costs of administration. … These papers clearly show that Grace C. West had only a life estate in the property and that these appellees had an interest therein as remaindermen.

State v. Glover

2014 Ohio 3228 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 2014

It is “a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by, and clearly against, reason and evidence.” State v. … Id. at 1316.  {¶27} For this reason, the Supreme Court qualified Coleman and held that “[i]nadequate assistance of counsel at initial-review collateral proceedings may establish cause for a prisoner’s procedural