Seal of the State of Ohio. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page. Line Drawing of the Ohio Judicial Center. Click here to return to the Supreme Court home page.
Spacer image

The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System

Issues Accepted for Review

About |  Help
Download PDFadobe icon

  All open cases and cases closed in past 180 days.
Case No.Case CaptionCase StatusDate
Accepted
Case Issue
2016-1395 State of Ohio v. Colton Dye OPEN 11/9/2016 PURSUANT TO R.C. 295352, MUST TRIAL COURTS WAIT UNTIL THE APPLICABLE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS EXPIRED PRIOR TO SEALING THE RECORDS OF A CASE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE?
2016-1297 State of Ohio v. Ahmad Mobarak OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 whether it was an offense to sell or possess controlled substance analogs after the enactment of 201 1 Am.Sub.H.Bl No. 64 but prior to December 26, 2012 when the legislature enacted a bill "to create the offenses of trafficking in and possession of controlled substance analogs." (Emphasis added.) 2012 Am.Sub.I-l.B. No. 334.
2016-1168 State of Ohio v. Ahmad Mobarak OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 Proposition of Law: As effective October 17, 2011, R.C. 3719.013 mandated that "controlled substance analogs" shall be treated as Schedule I controlled substances for purposes of any provision in the Revised Code. The trafficking and possession statutes were part of die Revised Code and therefore were subject to this broad incorporation of analogs into the Revised Code.
2016-1138 City of Toledo v. State of Ohio et al. OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 Ohio's traffic-camera statutes are general laws that displace conflicting municipal traffic-camera ordinances enacted pursuant to a municipality's police powers
2016-1136 City of Toledo v. State of Ohio et al. OPEN
(Held)
10/26/2016 Whether Am.Sub.S.B. No. 342 is an unconstitutional infringement of Municipalities' right to self-governance under Article XVIII, Section 3, of the Ohio Constitution.
2016-1033 State of Ohio v. Christina Bettis OPEN
(Held)
11/23/2016 Proposition of Law: A person is not subject to prosecution under R.C. 2919.21(B) for the nonpayment of an arrearage-only child support order when the person is providing support to an unemancipated child and residing with the child during the same period during which it is alleged that the person failed to make payments on arrearages.
2016-1024 State of Ohio v. Harry E. Jackson OPEN
(Held)
10/5/2016 Proposition of Law No. 1 Appellate counsel renders ineffective assistance when they neglect to present issues which have a reasonable probability of success on appeal where a "reasonable probability" is a defined as a probability sufficient to undermine one's confidence in the outcome.
2016-1020 State of Ohio v. Andrea Beasley OPEN 10/5/2016 Proposition of Law No: A trial counsel's unrefuted proffer summarizing an unrecorded conference is sufficient to preserve an error for appeal.
2016-1014 Brecksville-Broadview Heights Board of Education, et al. v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision (Appeal By: TMMC Ohio, L.L.C.) OPEN 11/9/2016 Proposition of Law No. I: A publicly advertised auction that occurred in an open market, without compulsion or duress, between a buyer and a seller, each acting in his own self-interest, and where the highest bid was accepted constitutes an arm's length transaction for real property taxation purposes.
2016-1014 Brecksville-Broadview Heights Board of Education, et al. v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision (Appeal By: TMMC Ohio, L.L.C.) OPEN 11/9/2016 Proposition of Law No. II: The Board of Tax Appeals ("BTA") cannot change a Board of Revision ("BOR") Decision if the BOR relied upon competent evidence without additional evidence being presented to the BTA.
12345678910...
Case Issue Votes
lbCaseNumber

lbCaseCaptionShort

lbCaseIssueDescription