01/05/2017


Case Caption

Case No.Topics and IssuesAuthorDecided
Wojanowski v. Wojanowski 103695Divorce; postdecree contempt; attorney fees. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to award wife attorney fees on her postdecree contempt motions against husband, despite husband's greater income, where record demonstrated that wife, not husband, was in contempt of court and wife waived attorney fees at several points prior to final hearing.Kilbane 1/5/2017
State v. Kibble 103822Sentencing; R.C. 2953.08; aggravated robbery; consecutive sentences; R.C. 2929.14; limited sentencing review; R.C. 2929.11; R.C. 2929.12; defective indictment; Double Jeopardy; plain error; restitution; R.C. 2929.18; agreed amount of restitution. Appellant's 30-year prison sentence was not contrary to law because the court made the required findings for consecutive sentences and considered the required factors when crafting a sentence. The indictment was not defective where it did not provide the name of numerous victims, but provided either a name or other identifying characteristics sufficient for appellant to invoke the protections of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution. However, the trial court committed plain error in imposing restitution to victims related to charges in the indictment that were later dismissed in the absence of an agreement.Celebrezze 1/5/2017
State v. Ward 104012Guilty plea; Crim.R. 11(C); allied offenses; sentence; R.C. 2953.08(A)(4). The trial court complied with Crim.R. 11(C) in accepting appellant's plea. Although he contends on appeal that he did not understand the rights he was waiving or the nature of the charges to which he was pleading, the record shows that the trial court explained both to the appellant and that he indicated he understood. The trial court properly did not merge the sentences because the offenses of aggravated vehicular homicide; failure to stop at an accident; and failure to comply were committed separately with a separate intent. R.C. 2953.08 precludes appellate review of a sentence unless the appellant advances a claim that the sentence is contrary to law.Blackmon 1/5/2017
Rocky River v. Collins 104180Trial court's schedule; probable cause for traffic stop; admission of evidence; LEADS report discovery; suspension; jury instructions. Trial court did not err in scheduling the community control violation hearing prior to trial for driving under suspension and falsification because the schedule was set at request of the defendant and scheduling did not prevent the defendant from adequately representing himself. Officer's observation of traffic infraction and LEADS report showing license suspension constituted probable cause to stop vehicle. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing officer to testify that the initial report of the citation erroneously indicated that defendant was traveling northbound. Defendant's failure to receive LEADS report during discovery did not constitute reversible error where defendant admitted to the offenses in the instant case and defendant received prior notice of each item listed in the LEADS report. Defendant's challenge to the underlying suspension was rejected in a prior appeal so the trial court did not err in failing to reverse the suspension previously ordered. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's requested jury instructions where defendant was permitted to testify as to each of the items that were the subject of his pro se proffered instructions.Kilbane 1/5/2017
State v. Paulino 104198Guilty plea; Crim.R. 11; presentence investigation report; R.C. 2953.08(G)(2); presumption of prison; R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12. Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant's presentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea, where appellant was represented by highly competent counsel, he was afforded a full Crim.R.11 hearing before entering his plea, he was given a complete and impartial hearing on the motion, and the record shows the trial court gave full and fair consideration to the plea withdrawal request. Where the trial court imposed prison, it had no duty to order a presentence investigation report. However, the record indicates the court ordered and considered the PSI prior to imposing sentence. Appellant's conviction of a second-degree felony carries a presumption of prison, and where the court imposed prison, it had no duty to make specific findings. The record demonstrates the trial court considered R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, and appellant's sentence is not contrary to law. To the extent the appellant disagreed with the court's discretion in weighing the sentencing factors, we have no jurisdiction for review.McCormack 1/5/2017
State v. King 104293R.C. 2925.03/driver's license suspension; void sentence. The trial court did not include suspension of appellant's driver's license as part of appellant's sentence, and that portion of appellant's sentence is void.Jones 1/5/2017
Bank of New York Melon Trust Co. v. Zakrajsek 104367A foreclosure action consists of two judgments that can be appealed: the order of foreclosure and the confirmation of sale. The appellant did not file a notice of appeal from the order of foreclosure, but only filed a notice of appeal from the confirmation of sale, so he could not raise issues on appeal relating to the foreclosure. For purposes of App.R. 16(A)(7), the word "argument" means more than just an assertion that an error occurred - it is an obligation to persuade an appellate court why an error exists. This means that the appellate brief must contain a reason or set of reasons to support the claimed error. An assertion of error that is not developed in a party's brief does not preserve a claim of appellate review.Stewart 1/5/2017
In re R.J.G. 104703Attorney fees; Loc.Juv.R. 50; abuse of discretion - Juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying mother's motion for attorney fees in connection with father's request to modify allocation of parental rights and responsibilities where counsel failed to comply with Loc.Juv.R. 50(B)(2).Gallagher 1/5/2017