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 23, 2008

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

TOPICS:
- Criminal law / Speedy trial
- Attorneys at law / Disciplinary violations
- Animals / Noise / Ordinance
- Attorneys at law / Misconduct
- Unauthorized practice of law
- Sentencing
- Sexual predator classification
- Frivolous Appeal
- Medicare Act / Subject matter jurisdiction
 

Ohio Supreme Court

 

State v. Blackburn (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1823)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1823.pdf
-  Criminal law * Speedy trial * R.C. 2945.71 * In calculating the time within which a criminal defendant must be brought to trial under R.C. 2945.71, periods of delay resulting from motions filed by the defendant in a previous case also apply in a subsequent case in which there are different charges based on the same underlying facts and circumstances of the previous case. 
 
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Mitchell (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1822)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1822.pdf
-  Attorneys at law * Multiple disciplinary violations, including deceit, frivolous lawsuits, and use of false evidence * 18-month suspension with 12-month stay and probation. 
 
Columbus v. Kim (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1817)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1817.pdf
-  Animals * Noise * Ordinance prohibiting harboring an animal that “howls, barks, or emits audible sounds that are unreasonably loud or disturbing which are of such character, intensity, and duration as to disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood or to be detrimental to the life and health of any individual” not unconstitutionally vague. 
 
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Mishler (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1810)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1810.pdf
-  Attorneys at law * Misconduct * Multiple violations of the Disciplinary Rules * Violation of rule prohibiting fee-splitting not found * Two-year license suspension with one year stayed on conditions.
 
State v. Silverman (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1845)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1845.pdf
-  Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Fulmer. 
 
Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Martin (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1809)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1809.pdf
-  Unauthorized practice of law*Franchised document-preparation service*Legal advice*Violations enjoined, monetary penalties imposed, and refunds ordered*Apparent agency relationship between franchisor and franchisee not shown.
 
Dayton Bar Assn. v. Ellison (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1808)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1808.pdf
-  Attorneys at law * Misconduct * Neglect of entrusted legal matter * Conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law * Conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation * One-year suspension, stayed on conditions. 
 
Akron Bar Assn. v. Finan (Slip Opinion) (April 23, 2008) (2008-Ohio-1807)
-  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-ohio-1807.pdf
-  Attorneys * Misconduct * Improperly notarizing signature on affidavit * Public reprimand. 
 

First District Court of Appeals

[Search Other Ohio Districts]
 

*** Judgment Entries ***
 
State of Ohio vs. Antonio Davis (April 23, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070469_04232008.pdf
-  Davis appeals the trial court’s judgment convicting him of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor in violation of R.C. 2907.04(A), a fourth-degree felony. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Stephen Moore (April 23, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070519_04232008.pdf
-  Moore was sentenced to concurrent terms of eight years for the aggravated arson, 18 months for the felony arson, and 180 days for the misdemeanor arson. Moore alleges that his sentences were contrary to law because they were excessive. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Raymond Prather (April 23, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070579_04232008.pdf
-  Prather appeals the trial court’s judgment classifying him as a sexual predator. Judgment AFFIRMED.
 
State of Ohio vs. Sheldon Jones (April 23, 2008)
-  http://www.hamilton-co.org/appealscourt/docs/decisions/C-070580_04232008.pdf
-  Jones was found guilty of aggravated robbery and felonious assault, each with an accompanying firearm specification. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 21 years’ imprisonment. Jones' counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Anders. Judgment AFFFIRMED.
 

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

 

Giesse v. Sec of the Dept of (April 23, 2008)(Appeal from N.D. OH)
-  http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0163p-06.pdf
-  Plaintiff-appellant Raymond Giesse appeals the district court’s grant of two motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after he filed a suit seeking damages subsequent to an alleged wrongful termination of medical care. Plaintiff argues that the district court had jurisdiction over his claims because he has a vested “property interest” in the receipt of Medicare benefits, and that the termination of these benefits, without adequate due process, amounted to a deprivation of his constitutional rights. Because he alleges constitutional claims, and because these claims are “wholly collateral” to his administrative claims, plaintiff contends that his federal claims do not “arise under” the Medicare Act, and may therefore be addressed by the district court. In the alternative, plaintiff argues that an implied right of action exists in the Medicare context under Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We disagree and affirm the judgment of the district court.
 

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

 

No Opinions.
 

Daily Case Updates