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 or 2006.

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

April 5, 2006

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

TOPICS:
- Criminal Law - Death penalty
- Unconstitutional legislation - lack of jurisdiction
- Attorney Misconduct
- Elections - Township zoning
- Public offices * Special audits
- Public health - sewage disposal system
- Manifest weight evidence - Jury
- Sentencing Guidelines
- Plea agreement
- Evidence - Jury Instruction
- Final order - Lack of Appeal
- Adoption-assistance benefits
- Landlord Tenant - Writ of restitution
- Appellate-waiver provision
- Writ of habeas corpus
- Sentencing Guideline
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

State v. Barton (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1324)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1324.pdf
-  Criminal law * Aggravated murder * Death penalty upheld.
 
State ex rel. United Auto., Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of Am. v. Bur. of Workers' Comp. (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1327)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1327.pdf
-  Mandamus sought to compel state agency to ignore allegedly unconstitutional legislation * Lack of jurisdiction * Adequate remedy at law * Writ denied.
 
Dayton Bar Assn. v. Fox (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1328)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1328.pdf
-  Attorneys at law * Misconduct * Neglect of an entrusted legal matter * Failure to promptly return property of a client * Conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation * Failure to cooperate in disciplinary proceedings.
 
Disciplinary Counsel v. Henderson (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1336)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1336.pdf
-  Attorneys at law * Misconduct * Conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation * Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice * Conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law * Failure to return funds to client * Failure to cooperate in disciplinary investigation * Practicing law during suspension*Disbarment.
 
State ex rel. Gemienhardt v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Elections (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1666)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1666.pdf
-  Mandamus * Elections * Township zoning amendment * Compliance with O.R.C. 519.12(H) * Board of Elections did not act in an unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable manner * Writ denied.
 
Oriana House, Inc. v. Montgomery (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1325)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1325.pdf
-  Public offices * Special audits * Community-based correctional facilities ("CBCFs") * O.R.C. 117.10 and 2301.56(E)(1) give State Auditor power to conduct special audit of CBCFs as private organizations receiving public funds * State Auditor has broad authority under O.R.C. 117.18(A) to issue subpoenas of records in connection with special audit * Subpoena must be lawful, relevant, and not unreasonably burdensome.
 
Clark v. Greene Cty. Combined Health Dist. (April 5, 2006) (2006-Ohio-1326)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-1326.pdf
-  Public health * Combined health districts * District has authority to prevent homeowner from installing individual household sewage disposal system when the property is accessible to a sanitary sewerage system, even when that sewerage system is controlled by township of which homeowner is not a resident * "Accessible" defined.
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 

*** Judgment Entries ***
 
State v. Johnson (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-040722.pdf
-  Johnson was found guilty by a jury of aggravated robbery, robbery and felonious assault.  Johnson argues that the jury lost its way in believing the testimony of Richardson, Johnson's accomplice in the offenses, who cooperated with police, testified against Johnson, and received a one-year sentence. He also alleges that, pursuant to O.R.C. 2929.14(B), the trial court erred in sentencing Johnson to more than the minimum term of imprisonment for each offense, because he had not previously served a prison term. Judgment AFFIRMED although sentence is VACATED and REMANDED to the trial court for resentencing.
 
State v. Hawkins (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050033.pdf
-  Hawkins was convicted of possession of cocaine under O.R.C. 2929.11(A), a fourth-degree felony.  He argues that the trial court failed to make the necessary findings to justify sending Hawkins to prison for a fourth-degree felony, instead of ordering community control. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State v. Carter (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050140.pdf
-  Carter was charged with two counts of assault on a peace officer.  The court entered a judgment finding Carter not guilty by reason of insanity.  Carter challenges the court's finding that the state had proved all the elements of the offenses. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State v. Lee (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050256.pdf
-  Lee pled guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide, vehicular assault, failure to stop after an accident, and failure to comply with an order of a police officer.  The court determined that Lee was entering his plea voluntarily and informed Lee of the rights he was waiving by entering into a plea agreement.  Lee argues that the trial court erred in informing him that he faced the maximum sentence for each offense, because the trial court was barred from imposing a maximum sentence. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State v. Watkins (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050335.pdf
-  Watkins was convicted of rape, in violation of O.R.C. 2907.02(A)(2).  Watkins challenges the weight and the sufficiency of the evidence produced at trial to support his conviction. He argues that the trial court erred by instructing the jury on transferred intent. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
Capital One Bank v. Debra (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050362.pdf
-  Capital One Bank sued DeBra for monies allegedly due on a credit-card account.  The trial court found in favor of Capital One and ordered DeBra to pay the bank $1,511.22.  Because DeBra failed to appeal from the final order of the trial court, we are without jurisdiction over this case and we DISMISS the appeal.
 
Weaver v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Services (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050449.pdf
-  Weaver was not eligible for adoption-assistance benefits for her daughter.  Weaver requested a state hearing with respect to the termination, and Weaver's request was denied. Weaver appealed to the court of common pleas.  The common pleas court overruled Weaver's objections and affirmed the magistrate's decision.  Weaver now appeals to the Court of Appeals, arguing that the agency had agreed in 1999 to provide retroactive adoption-assistance benefits, so the agency was precluded from terminating benefits. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
Funck v. Pierce d/b/a Pierce Energy Conserving (April 5, 2006)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/Decisions/C-050487.pdf
-  Funck owns a building on Montgomery Road. Funck allowed Pierce to use a portion of the building as an apartment.  In exchange, Pierce agreed to manage the building instead of paying rent.  Pierce had a conflict with another tenant in the building resulting in criminal proceedings. Pierce resigned from his position as building manager. Funck asked Pierce to move out. Pierce claimed that Funck was retaliating against him because he had subpoenaed Funck as a witness in the criminal proceedings. The magistrate rejected Pierce's retaliatory-evidence defense and granted Funck possession of the premises. Pierce then objected to the magistrate's decision granting the writ of restitution. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 

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

 

USA v. Sharp (April 5, 2006) (Appeal from N.D. Ohio)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0121p-06.pdf
-  Pursuant to a plea agreement, Raysheen Sharp pled guilty to a charge of conspiracy to make, utter, and possess counterfeit and forged securities. Sharp was subsequently sentenced to 33 months of imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $49,599.74. On appeal, Sharp argues that: (1) he is entitled to be resentenced pursuant to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), (2) the district court failed to follow Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005), in calculating his criminal history category, and (3) the district court abused its discretion in calculating the amount of restitution. Sharp does not challenge his conviction. The government filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that Sharp has waived his right to appeal pursuant to the terms of his plea agreement. Sharp contends, however, that the district court did not adhere to the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure when it failed to ascertain that he understood the precise terms of the appellate-waiver provision. For the reasons set forth below, the government's motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
 

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

 

McCalvin v. Yukins (April 5, 2006) (Appeal from E.D. Michigan)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0119p-06.pdf
-  At issue in this habeas case is the voluntariness of Traci L. McCalvin's confession. McCalvin was convicted of second-degree murder. During her trial, McCalvin moved to suppress her confession, but the trial court denied the motion as untimely because under Michigan law such motions generally must be filed before trial unless special circumstances are present. The district court granted McCalvin a writ of habeas corpus, ruling that there existed cause and prejudice sufficient to excuse her procedural default because she had established that her counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file the motion to suppress before trial. The district court then found McCalvin's confession involuntary because, among other things, a detective told McCalvin that, if she were convicted of first-degree murder, she would not have contact with her family, including her children. We reverse.
 
USA v. Van Hoosier (April 5, 2006) (Appeal from E.D. Tennessee)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0120p-06.pdf
-  In this case, Mark Van Hoosier pled guilty to a four-count indictment involving manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of a firearm in connection with a drug trafficking crime. The district court accepted Van Hoosier's guilty plea and proceeded to sentence him pursuant to the five-year mandatory minimum required for possession of a firearm in connection with a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). The government now appeals alleging that Van Hoosier ought to have been sentenced pursuant to the ten-year mandatory minimum contained in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(B)(i). For the reasons stated below, we REVERSE the district court's judgment and remand the case for imposition of the ten year mandatory minimum.
 

Daily Case Updates