Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
Judge, Ohio Court of Appeals
State v. Rogers
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-11
In State v. Rogers, defendant Robert Rogers appealed his convictions and sentences from the Ross County Common Pleas Court in two consolidated cases involving multiple first-degree felony counts of cocaine trafficking and possession, along with third-degree felony weapons-under-disability charges. He argued that the trial court committed plain error by imposing consecutive sentences, claiming violations of due process and protections against cruel and unusual punishment. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the aggregate 33.5- to 39-year prison term. The court held that the trial court properly made the required findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) both on the record and in the sentencing entry, that the sentences fell within statutory ranges, and that the record supported the findings under the deferential standard of R.C. 2953.8(G)(2). Because Rogers did not object at sentencing, the court reviewed only for plain error and found none.
criminal law
State v. A.K.
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-09
The case involved A.K.'s appeal from his Adams County convictions for one count of rape, two counts of gross sexual imposition, and felonious assault with a sexual motivation specification, arising from allegations that he sexually abused his biological daughter M.K. multiple times when she was between the ages of about five and eight. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment of conviction and sentence. It held that allowing the victim to testify outside the defendant's presence via closed-circuit television did not violate the Confrontation Clause under existing precedent and satisfied R.C. 2945.481(C) and (E), because the State showed by a preponderance of the evidence (including the victim's own statements and observed emotional distress on the stand) that she would suffer serious emotional trauma if required to testify in A.K.'s presence, and the prosecutor established good cause for the untimely request. The court also rejected the remaining assignments of error concerning the late discovery issue, amendment of the indictment, evidentiary sufficiency and weight, and sentencing compliance.
criminal lawprocedurecivil rights
State v. Withers
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-09
In State v. Withers, the defendant was convicted after a jury trial of involuntary manslaughter and multiple counts of failing to confine or control his dogs, based on evidence that his two pit bulls escaped his home in October 2024 and fatally attacked a neighbor. Withers appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of a prior 2023 dog attack and prior observations of his unsecured door, that the evidence was insufficient, and that his counsel was ineffective. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions. The court held that Withers forfeited his evidentiary objections, so review was for plain error only, and found no obvious error: the prior-attack evidence was relevant to establish that the dogs were dangerous or vicious for purposes of the felony enhancements under the applicable version of R.C. 955.22 and 955.99, Evid.R. 404(B) does not apply to animals, and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice; the door evidence argument was not properly developed on appeal.
criminal lawprocedure
State v. Withers
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-09
In State v. Withers, the defendant was convicted after a jury trial of involuntary manslaughter and multiple counts of failing to confine or control his dogs, based on evidence that his two pit bulls escaped his home in October 2024 and fatally attacked a neighbor. Withers appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of a prior 2023 dog attack and prior observations of his unsecured door, that the evidence was insufficient, and that his counsel was ineffective. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions. The court held that Withers forfeited his evidentiary objections, so review was for plain error only, and found no obvious error: the prior-attack evidence was relevant to establish that the dogs were dangerous or vicious for purposes of the felony enhancements under the applicable version of R.C. 955.22 and 955.99, Evid.R. 404(B) does not apply to animals, and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice; the door evidence argument was not properly developed on appeal.
criminal lawprocedure
State v. McKnight
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-09
The case involved Rickey L. McKnight, who was charged with aggravated burglary and felonious assault after entering a residence he owned (where J.M. was a tenant) on December 10, 2024, using a key, striking the sleeping victim to wake him, and then assaulting him during a dispute over a $20 debt, resulting in J.M.’s injuries including a fractured vertebra and broken rib. McKnight was acquitted of aggravated burglary but convicted by a jury of burglary and felonious assault; the trial court sentenced him to prison terms totaling 7.5 years. On appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding that they were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court reasoned that McKnight trespassed by stealth when he entered without announcement while the victim slept, that any consent to enter was revoked once the assault began, and that the jury reasonably rejected his self-defense claim after weighing the conflicting testimony.
criminal lawproperty
State v. McKnight
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2026-06-09
The case involved Rickey L. McKnight, who was charged with aggravated burglary and felonious assault after entering a residence he owned (where J.M. was a tenant) on December 10, 2024, using a key, striking the sleeping victim to wake him, and then assaulting him during a dispute over a $20 debt, resulting in J.M.’s injuries including a fractured vertebra and broken rib. McKnight was acquitted of aggravated burglary but convicted by a jury of burglary and felonious assault; the trial court sentenced him to prison terms totaling 7.5 years. On appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding that they were supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court reasoned that McKnight trespassed by stealth when he entered without announcement while the victim slept, that any consent to enter was revoked once the assault began, and that the jury reasonably rejected his self-defense claim after weighing the conflicting testimony.
criminal lawproperty