Volume 202 — North Eastern Reporter, Third Series

drug possession with a major drug offender specification no ineffective assistance of trial counsel sentencing statute known as the "Reagan Tokes Law" is not unconstitutional on grounds of due process, separation of powers, or jury right constitutionality not raised and no plain error order imposing costs without mentioning them at sentencing hearing is not reversible because post-judgment motion can be filed as to costs and additional costs "court-appointed counsel costs" were improperly imposed in sentencing entry to the extent the court attempted to require reimbursement of counsel fees.

R.C. 5313.02 – LAND INSTALLMENT CONTACT – R.C. 5301.01 –PART PERFORMANCE – EXECUTION: Where plaintiff buyer sued to enforce a purported land installment contract, the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendants sellers where the contract at issue was never fully executed and the parties did not perform under the contract.

R.C. 2901.02 criminal jurisdiction of the municipal court criminal complaint R.C. 2923.02 R.C. 2911.13 attempt passing bad checks. Appellant was convicted after trial on a complaint filed in municipal court that alleged appellant attempted to pass a bad check of $7,500 in violation of R.C. 2923.02 and 2913.11. The complaint charged a felony offense. Pursuant to R.C. 2901.02, the municipal court did not have jurisdiction to try a complaint alleging a felony offense. Conviction vacated, and case remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Defendant-appellant's possession-of-drugs convictions and associated firearm specifications are supported by sufficient evidence. Defendant-appellant's possession-of-drugs convictions are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to remove a juror who disclosed a relationship with a member of defendant-appellant's family. Plaintiff-appellee's improper comments during closing statements do not constitute plain error. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by issuing a jury instruction on complicity. Plaintiff-appellee did not breach an enforceable plea agreement. Defendant-appellant did not receive ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Defendant-appellant's sentences are neither unsupported by the record nor contrary to law.

Appellant's waiver of his right to a jury trial did not strictly comply with R.C. 2945.05. The written jury waiver form was not "signed by the defendant" when, absent extraordinary circumstances, the form was signed by defense counsel for the defendant with defendant's consent. Judgment reversed and remanded.

CRIMINAL LAW - attempted failure to comply mandatory consecutive prison sentence R.C. 2921.331, 2923.02, and 2929.14(C)(3) jail-time credit clerical mistake nunc pro tunc entry substantive discrepancy Crim.R. 43.

CIVIL – Municipality is immune from suit by bystander/victim of for injuries allegedly caused by confrontation with police canine during pursuit of a fleeing suspect through bystander's backyard. Deployment of a police canine is a governmental function.

Motion to suppress Miranda rights custodial interrogation knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived one's Miranda rights interpreter totality of the circumstances sufficiency of the evidence manifest weight of the evidence right to remain silent allied offenses dissimilar in import separate and identifiable harms consecutive sentences R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) and improper sentence. Under the totality of the circumstances test, defendant-appellant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights. The convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court did not violate the defendant-appellant's right to remain silent when it reiterated the Fifth Amendment and stated the defendant-appellant had a choice to testify on his own behalf or remain silent. The trial court did not err when it found the aggravated burglary and felony-murder convictions did not merge at sentencing because the offenses were dissimilar in import and resulted in separate and identifiable harms. The trial court made the necessary findings pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(C)(4), and those findings were issued in a corresponding journal entry. The trial court imposed a proper sentence in conformity with R.C. 2929.02(B)(1).

Plain error R.C. 2941.25 allied offenses of similar import murder aggravated burglary Reagan Tokes Law indefinite sentencing provisions right to trial by jury separation of powers due process. Trial court did not commit plain error in failing to merge defendant's murder and aggravated burglary offenses for sentencing where defendant failed to show — based on the record — a reasonable probability that his convictions were for allied offenses of similar import committed with the same conduct and without a separate animus. Defendant's constitutional challenges to the Reagan Tokes Law are overruled pursuant to the en banc decision in State v. Delvallie, 2022-Ohio-470, 185 N.E.3d 536 (8th Dist.).

noncompete agreement motion to enforce settlement issue of law reviewed de novo contract interpretation common words are given their ordinary meaning.

sufficiency of the evidence, aggravated trafficking in drugs, R.C. 2925.03(A)(1), R.C. 2925.03(C)(1)(e), R.C. 2925.03(I), engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, R.C. 2923.31(I)(2)(c), inconsistent verdicts, Evid.R. 602, personal knowledge, Evid.R. 901, chain of custody, Evid.R. 1003, Crim.R. 52(A)

summary judgment, manifest weight of the evidence, fraudulent inducement, deceptive trade practices, breach of contract