Merit Decisions

Subscribe to Merit Decisions via RSS

“The record is quite clear that Burns did not control the misappropriated funds: the money was never in his possession, nor did he exert any control over it.”

Justice Donnelly, majority opinion

“The General Assembly could have included a ‘control’ element in R.C. 9.39; however, it did not. Instead, the statute applies to public officials…

On November 23, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in Maternal Grandmother v. Hamilton Cty. Dept. of Job & Family Servs. Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-4096. In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Fischer, in which Justice DeWine, joined by Justice Kennedy, concurred in judgment only, the Court held that…

On November 18, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in State v. LaRosa, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-4060. In a 4-3 decision written by Justice Fischer and joined by Chief Justice O’Connor and Justices Kennedy and DeWine, the Court held that the trial court did not err in denying…

“While Walls’s role was vital and essential to the hospital, he was not engaged in the active practice of medicine or in a role adjunctive to patient care.”

Justice Fischer, opinion of the Court

On September 22, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in Johnson v. Abdullah, Slip Opinion No.

“The city’s billboard tax infringes on the rights to free speech and a free press protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Justice Kennedy, opinion of the Court

On September 16, 2021 the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in Lamar Advantage GP Co., L.L.C. v. Cincinnati, Slip…

“Unless the trial court knows or has reason to know of a potential conflict, the court does not have an affirmative duty to inquire about the attorney’s joint representation of codefendants.”

Justice Stewart, Majority Opinion

“I would address the right to counsel in Article I, Section 10 of the Ohio Constitution and hold that it…

“Because R.C. 109.78(D) and R.C. 2923.122(D)(1)(a) are unambiguous and do not conflict with each other, we must apply both statues as written unless and until the General Assembly directs otherwise by legislative action.”

Chief Justice O’Connor, majority opinion

“To reach its conclusion, the majority finds it necessary to forsake a plain reading of [R.C. 109.78(D)].

Update: On September 30, 2021, Tidwell was found guilty of one count of OVI.

“Based on the totality of the circumstances then confronting the officer, we hold that his investigatory stop of Tidwell was reasonable and thus did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

Justice Donnelly, opinion of the Court

On…

“Additionally, we conclude that the difference between a sentence of life in prison with parole eligibility after a term of years and a sentence of life without the possibility of parole is not material for purposes of an Eighth Amendment challenge by an offender who was a juvenile when he or she committed the offense.”…

“Here, there is simply no textual basis to support requiring a trial court to make explicit findings on the record regarding the defendant’s ability to pay before assessing court-appointed-counsel fees.”

Justice Fischer, lead opinion

“Nothing in the Revised Code explicitly grants trial courts the authority to assess appointed-counsel fees as part of a criminal case.”…