Daily Case Update Archive

As a service to our members, we monitor opinions issued from the Ohio Supreme Court, the Ohio State First District Court of Appeals, and the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.  You can read the latest summaries or archived summaries from 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010 , 2011.

If you would like to receive a daily e-mail with same-day case updates, please join our Subscribers-Only discussion list.  Not a subscriber?  Join today!

May 14th, 2008

Ohio Supreme Court | Ohio First District | U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States
 

TOPICS:
- Habeas corpus
- Criminal law / Sentencing
- Discrimination / Sexual Orientation
- Sentencing / Plea involuntary
- Community control violation / Ineffective Counsel
- Real Property / Security Deposit
- Anders v. California
- Evidence / Insufficient / Manifest weight
- Mortgage default / Deficiency judgment / Receivership
- Frivolous Appeal
- Constitutional rights / 1983 actions for prisoners
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

Christian v. Gansheimer (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2219)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2219.pdf
-  Habeas corpus * Petition failed to state a viable claim * Successive petition barred by res judicata * Court of appeals’ dismissal of petition affirmed.
 
State v. Ramey (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2218)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2218.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Rich (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2217)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2217.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Broyles (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008)(2008-Ohio-2216)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2216.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Roberson (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2215)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2215.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Vogt (Slip Opinion)(May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2205)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2205.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Jackson (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2204)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2204.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Balderson (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2203)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2203.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Harmon (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2202)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2202.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Mayle (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2201)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2201.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Cruzado (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2200)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2200.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins. 
 
Tenney v. Gen. Elec. Co. (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2199)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2199.pdf
-  Judgment of the court of appeals reversed on the authority of Doe v. First United Methodist Church and Love v. Port Clinton.
 
State v. Nickum (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2198)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2198.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 
State v. Borders (Slip Opinion) (May 14, 2008) (2008-Ohio-2197)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-2197.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Simpkins.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 

*** Judgment Entries ***
 
State of Ohio vs. Tracy Freeman (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070674_05142008.pdf
-  Freeman appeals his conviction and the sentence of incarceration imposed by the trial court following Freeman*s plea of guilty to one count of tampering with evidence and an accompanying firearm specification. Freeman argues that (1) the trial court imposed an unlawful sentence because under State v. Foster, (2) because he was 18 years old and had not graduated from high school his plea was not voluntarily made, and (3) his trial counsel was ineffective for permitting Freeman “to plea despite telling [the presentence investigator] that he was not involved” in the killing. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Michael Sanders (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070639_05142008.pdf
-  Sanders argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him to a term of incarceration that was contrary to law. Sanders now argues that his sentence was excessive. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Kelly McMillian (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070602_05142008.pdf
-  McMillan was found guilty following a bench trial of violating a protection order, a first-degree misdemeanor, in violation of R.C. 2919.27(A)(1). McMillan alleges that (1) his conviction was based on insufficient evidence, (2) his conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence, and (3) he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
Yolonda Fincher vs. Director, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070553_05142008.pdf
-  Fincher appeals pro se from the entry of the trial court adopting the May 15, 2007, magistrate*s decision affirming the Unemployment Compensation Review Commission*s determination that Fincher had fraudulently misrepresented her employment status to collect unemployment benefits. Fincher has raised six assignments of error challenging the hearing officer*s and the commission*s factual findings, and their interpretation of R.C. 4141.35, which defines fraudulent misrepresentation to obtain benefits, their orders to repay the benefits, and again challenging this court*s dismissal of her previous direct appeal from the magistrate*s decision. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Scott Williams (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070548_05142008.pdf
-  Williams was sentenced three times. He violated his community control multiple times. Williams argues that he was improperly sentenced for his community-control violation and ineffective assitance of counsel. Judgment REVERSED in Part and REMANDED for resentencing.
 
Stephanie Ruff vs. Jerry L. Hicks (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070533_05142008.pdf
-  Hicks appeals a judgment of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, Small Claims Division, in favor of plaintiff-appellee, Stephanie Ruff. A magistrate found that Ruff was entitled to the return of her security deposit under R.C. 5321.16. Hicks argues that trial court did not permit him to enter the lease agreement into evidence. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Donte Mincy (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070525_05142008.pdf
-  Mincy was indicted for felonious assault. He pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of aggravated assault and was sentenced to 12 months’ incarceration. Mincy’s counsel asks this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether the proceedings in the trial court were free from prejudicial error. Motion overruled and judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Orbie Harris (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070506_05142008.pdf
-  Harris was convicted of aggravated robbery with a firearm specification, robbery with a firearm specification, and having a weapon under a disability. Harris was sentenced to seven years and eleven months in prison. While the trial court verbally advised Harris that he would be subject to post-release control, it did not mention post-release control in its judgment entry. As a result, the trial court subsequently ordered that Harris, who was still serving his prison sentence, be returned to the trial court for resentencing. Harris now appeals from the trial court’s nunc pro tunc judgment entry, which added post-release control to his sentence. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Jeffrey Barrow (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070501_05142008.pdf
-  Barrow was indicted under two separate case numbers. In the case numbered B-0611862, Barrow was charged with three counts of receiving stolen property. In the case numbered B-0611743-A, Barrow was charged with theft and possessing criminal tools. Barrow argues that his convictions for theft and for possessing criminal tools in the case numbered B-0611743 were based on insufficient evidence, that they were against the manifest weight of the evidence, and that the trial court erred by denying his motions for a judgment of acquittal. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
Peoples Community Bank vs. William Banker, et al. (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070295_05142008.pdf
-  Banker defaulted on two mortgages held by Peoples Community Bank. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Peoples for over $300,000, and also ordered the sale of the properties. Banker asserts that (1) the court’s entry ordering a deficiency judgment against him was not a final appealable order, (2) the receiver failed to perform numerous functions, (3) the trial court erred in calculating the $91,375.09 deficiency judgment, (4) he was not given the opportunity to see the proposed entry terminating the receivership before the court entered it, and (5) he was not allowed ten days to respond to Peoples’ motion to terminate the receivership. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Antonio Strattman (May 14, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070255_05142008.pdf
-  Strattman was convicted with trafficking in cocaine, a fourth-degree felony if the offense was committed near a school. He was sentenced to 43 months' incarceration. Counsel requests permission to withdraw and, as required by Anders, asks that this court independently examine the record to determine if the proceedings below were free of prejudicial error. Judgment AFFIRMED and motion to withdraw as counsel overrule.
 

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:  Ohio Cases

 

No Opinions.
 

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases

 

Lockett v. Suardini (May 14, 2008)(Appeal from W.D. MI)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0181p-06.pdf
-  James A. Lockett, a prisoner at the Alger Maximum Correctional Facility in Michigan, is serving a sentence of 7 to 15 years for assault. During a misconduct hearing at the prison, Lockett became angry and used crude language to insult the hearing officer. He claims that two prison guards responded by forcibly removing him from the hearing room and assaulting him, thereby causing him to suffer minor cuts and lacerations. He further alleges that two prison nurses refused to treat his injuries. Lockett subsequently filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the two prison guards and the two nurses employed by the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), alleging that his First Amendment right of free speech was violated when the prison guards attacked him and the nurses denied him medical treatment in retaliation for insulting the hearing officer. He also claims that his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment was violated by the prison guards, who allegedly used excessive force against him, and by the nurses, who purportedly denied him medical treatment for his injuries. The prison guards, on the other hand, contend that Lockett became belligerent and threatening upon leaving the hearing and that they used reasonable force to control him. Furthermore, Lockett’s medical records showed that one of the nurse-defendants was never contacted to see him following the incident. The other nurse, who saw him twice within 24 hours of the incident, attested that she did not observe any injuries, nor did he tell her of any. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court, which granted summary judgment in favor of all the defendants.