On February 11, the Ohio Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of State v. Bissell. The Ohio Supreme Court must resolve what it means to act knowingly in Ohio. In November 2022, two vehicles crashed on the Cleveland Memorial Shoreway. Police officers from the city of Cleveland and village of Bratenahl responded to […]

An Ohio man convicted of smuggling his Honda Civic out of a downtown Cleveland repossession lot in 2022 will not get the chance to convince the state’s highest court that he was ambushed by new allegations during his trial. On March 3, the Ohio Supreme Court in a 7-1 vote denied John R. Hicks’ request

The Ohio Supreme Court hears oral arguments this week to weigh the constitutionality of a state law banning physicians from providing gender-affirming medical care to LGBTQ+ youth. On Tuesday, the state’s highest court is expected to hear from counsel in Moe v. Yost, a case filed by two 12-year-old transgender students and their families who

The Ohio Supreme Court takes up Akron v. Stone, determining whether an Akron man’s gun must be returned to him after he was arrested over a road-rage fistfight, where he threatened to shoot the other driver. After arresting him, police searched Stone’s car, finding his Smith and Wesson nine-millimeter handgun. But Stone argues that the

A unanimous Ohio Supreme Court dealt another blow last month to a Putnam County man seeking to dismiss an aggravated murder charge that has been pending against him since 2016. On January 20, the seven-member Court declined to hear arguments from 39-year-old Travis Soto, of Napoleon, on whether the Putnam County Prosecutor’s Office improperly reneged

The Case and the Law In Z.J. v. R.M., the Ohio Supreme Court addressed how courts should interpret Ohio’s menacing-by-stalking statute when considering whether to issue a civil stalking protection order. The case arose after Z.J. sought a civil stalking protection order against R.M. A magistrate granted the request, concluding that Z.J. only needed to show

The right to a speedy trial is one of the most fundamental protections in criminal law. Grounded in the Sixth Amendment and in analogous guarantees by state constitutions, the right to a speedy trial reflects the principle that the government must proceed with reasonable promptness when it accuses a person of a crime. On paper,

The Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of State v. Wilson in January. This case stems from a sixteen-year pre-indictment delay in the prosecution of Scott Wilson following the death of the victim in 2006. In 1985, Scott Wilson, while living with his girlfriend and her infant child, shook the child, causing

The Eighth District Court of Appeals sent a domestic violence case back to the trial court, because the judge failed to speak one critical finding aloud at the sentencing hearing—namely, that consecutive sentences were not “disproportionate” to the defendant’s conduct and the danger he posed. The reversal came not because a 48-month sentence for a

A recurring question for those who engage with the law: what purpose should the criminal justice system serve? Perspectives on that question often differ, reflecting the varied and deeply personal experiences individuals have with the system. Yet beneath those differing perspectives lies a shared expectation that the criminal justice system operates with sufficient legitimacy to