Case law

State v. Hudson, Unpublished Decision (3-28-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 2002

Moreover, this court has previously stated, "[t]here should also be evidence that the tester was properly qualified to test * * *. There should also be testimony concerning the procedure * * *." State v. … As a result of these deficiencies, it was clearly an error to admit the report into evidence.

In re C.G.

2014 Ohio 279 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 2014

the manifest-weight standard, a court of appeals weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses, and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the finder of fact clearly … The trial court found "[n]o amount of education, mentoring or tutoring" would help the parents become qualified to meet the children's "extraordinary custodial needs." (Judgment Entry, 3.)

State v. Renode

2020 Ohio 5430 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 25, 2020

Beginning with determining whether the statement was testimonial or nontestimonial, the record clearly establishes that A.B.’s statements during the 911 telephone call were made in order to obtain protection from immediate … In addition, as to Renode’s claim that the declaration was the product of reflective thought, Time is not necessarily the controlling factor in determining whether a statement qualifies as an excited utterance

Kienow v. Dir., Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

245 N.E.3d 937 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 2024

In so doing, the commission determined that Kienow had quit her job at Atrium without just cause and was therefore not qualified to receive any unemployment compensation benefits in accordance with to R.C. 4141.29(D)(2 … Failing to meet that requirement was sufficient to establish fault as it was defined in Tzangas. Id.

State v. Allen

2018 Ohio 887 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 2018

“[T]he smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to conduct a search.” State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47, 53, 734 N.E.2d 804 (2000). … Appellant argues that McGhee’s testimony was improper because he was not qualified as an expert under Evid.R. 702.

State v. Mabry

5 Ohio App. 3d 13 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 1982

The court’s instruction absolved the state from establishing appellant’s specific intent to kill Dr. … All the evidence presented clearly indicates that the assailant’s attempt to rob Dr. Nakhle brought about the confrontation which resulted in Dr. Nakhle’s injury.

Ohioans for Concealed Carry v. Columbus

2019 Ohio 3105 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2019

force at the time of their enactment, and in giving construction to a statute the legislature will not be presumed or held, to have intended a repeal of the settled rules of the common law unless the language employed by it clearly … In response the trial court stated: I think his background and experience qualifies him as an expert.

State v. Williams

2012 Ohio 5344 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2012

Appellant claims that the witness should not have been allowed to render an opinion on the cause of the breakage without having been qualified as an expert on the subject. … the issue which is to be established before them.

Russell Twp. Bd. of Trustees v. 7722 Fairmount, L.L.C.

258 N.E.3d 1232 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 16, 2024

Restrictions on the use of real property by ordinance, resolution or statute must be strictly construed, and the scope of the restrictions cannot be extended to include limitations not clearly … Marra remains in the home does not qualify as ‘single-family dwelling’ use.” Id. at ¶ 33. That “decision,” however, “was reached by applying the definitions of ‘family’ and ‘dwelling’ in the [Zoning] Resolution.” Id.

Teamsters Local Union No. 436 v. City of Cleveland

102 N.E.3d 101 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2017

The court concluded that "[i]t was clearly the intention of the General Assembly to vest SERB with broad authority to administer and enforce R.C. Chapter 4117. … under Chapter 3314. of the Revised Code; college preparatory boarding school established under Chapter 3328. of the Revised Code or its operator; state institution of higher learning

State v. Rohde

2014 Ohio 5580 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2014

However, we need not specifically address whether S.L.’s poem qualifies as a witness statement under the local rules, because the extent of Rohde’s cross-examination of S.L. … evidence, the appellate court must review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider witness credibility, and determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact “clearly

State v. Moore

2023 Ohio 3785 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 2023

The appellate court may take any action authorized by this division if it clearly and convincingly finds either of the following: (a) That the record does not support the sentencing court’s … but not to the extent of such certainty as is required ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ in criminal cases, and which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established

State v. Tillman, Unpublished Decision (11-22-2004)

2004 Ohio 6240 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 2004

Appellant argues that "allowing the `expert' testimony of the State's unlicensed psychological assistant caused unfair prejudice, confused the issues, and clearly mislead the jury regarding the weight that should be assigned … It is further well-established that "any communication between judge and jury that takes place outside the presence of the defendant * * * is error which may warrant the ordering of a new trial." Bostic v.

State ex rel. Matheny v. Indus. Comm.

190 N.E.3d 1209 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 31, 2022

that income wholly unrelated to job performance should not be included in the AWW calculation, McDulin does not appear to hold, as relator appears to contend, that every employment benefit measured by hour worked would qualify … Furthermore, questions of credibility and the weight to be given evidence are clearly within the discretion of the commission as fact finder. State ex rel. Teece v. Indus.

Columbus Green Cab Co. v. Miller

20 Ohio Law. Abs. 211 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 22, 1935

The evidence clearly shows that this collision was caused by the negligence of either the driver of the taxicab or the operator of the other car, or both. … The testimony of the defendant in error, Nelson, establishes the fact that he and Mrs. Mil-, ler were fare passengers. The testimony of both Mr. Nelson and Mrs.

State v. Linkous

2013 Ohio 5853 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2013

“The state need only establish that it is reasonably certain that substitution, alteration or tampering did not occur. … The prolonged deception over several hours was not incidental to Martin’s murder and clearly constituted a separate and distinct act.”).

Columbus v. Horton

2014 Ohio 4584 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2014

This substantial compliance standard excuses errors that are clearly de minimis, errors which the Supreme Court of Ohio has characterized as " 'minor procedural deviations.' " Burnside at ¶ 34, quoting Homan at 426. … {¶ 19} The nature of the city's burden to establish substantial compliance is determined by the degree of specificity with which the defendant challenges the legality of the test.

Baldonado v. Tackett, Unpublished Decision (12-21-2007)

2007 Ohio 6879 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2007

This determination was erroneous. {¶ 32} Clearly, a question of fact exists as to whether the dismissal of the criminal charge was the result of a compromise agreement. … *Page 12 {¶ 37} This assignment of error goes more to the false imprisonment/arrest claim and appellee Tackett's assertion of statutory immunity.

State v. Miller

2023 Ohio 1141 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2023

The relevant inquiry is “whether the bruising is severe enough to qualify as serious disfigurement.” Jarrell at ¶ 14. … Based on our resolution of the previous assignments of error, Miller cannot establish a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel.

State v. Grove

2016 Ohio 2721 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 28, 2016

Fabian reported that “[w]hile he likely qualifies for ADHD by history and borderline intellectual functioning, I cannot say with a reasonable degree of psychological and neuropsychological certainty that he qualifies for … He concedes that this alleged information is not in the record but it “reinforces the lack of voluntariness” of his plea, and therefore, he received ineffective assistance of counsel. {¶25} In order to establish