On May 11, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in In Re J.H., et al. A Minor Child (Appeal by A.H., Mother), 2021-0533. At issue in this case is whether a juvenile court improperly denied a pro se, indigent mother instituting child reunification proceedings her right to appointed

On May 11, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in In Re J.H., et al. A Minor Child (Appeal by A.H., Mother), 2021-0533. At issue in this case is whether a juvenile court improperly denied a pro se, indigent mother instituting child reunification proceedings her right to appointed

Read the analysis of the oral argument here.

On April 27, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in State of Ohio v. Alan Schubert, 2021-0761. At issue in this case is whether police officers may reasonably rely on a search warrant issued for a cell phone despite scant factual evidence linking

Read the analysis of the oral argument here.

On April 27, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in State of Ohio v. Alan Schubert, 2021-0761. At issue in this case is whether police officers may reasonably rely on a search warrant issued for a cell phone despite scant factual evidence linking

On May 17, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio, by a vote of 6-1, dismissed this case as improvidently accepted. Justice DeWine dissented and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

On April 26, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in State of Ohio v. Austin M. Fuell

On November 18, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in State v. LaRosa, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-4060. In a 4-3 decision written by Justice Fischer and joined by Chief Justice O’Connor and Justices Kennedy and DeWine, the Court held that the trial court did not err in denying

On November 18, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in State v. LaRosa, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-4060. In a 4-3 decision written by Justice Fischer and joined by Chief Justice O’Connor and Justices Kennedy and DeWine, the Court held that the trial court did not err in denying

“Here the container may not have announced its contents by the shape of the container, but didn’t it announce its contents by what was sticking out of the container?”

Justice DeWine to counsel for Burroughs

“In your view what was the single purpose of the backpack?”

Justice Fischer, to the prosecuting attorney 

On October 27

“Shouldn’t there be a nexus between what the person is on probation for and why they would search?”

Justice Donnelly, to the assistant county prosecutor

“So, what do we do about the fact there’s no remedy spelled out in the statute?”

Chief Justice O’Connor, to counsel for the defendant

On October 26, 2021, the Supreme

“Shouldn’t there be a nexus between what the person is on probation for and why they would search?”

Justice Donnelly, to the assistant county prosecutor

“So, what do we do about the fact there’s no remedy spelled out in the statute?”

Chief Justice O’Connor, to counsel for the defendant

On October 26, 2021, the Supreme

Update: On April 6, 2022, this appeal was unanimously dismissed as moot.

On November 9, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in M.R., a Cincinnati Police Officer pleading under a pseudonym v. Julie Niesen and Terhas White and James Noe and Alissa Gilley, 2020- 1131. At issue in this