690 N.E.2d 1288Supreme Court of Ohio.
1998.
MOTION DOCKET Wednesday, March 11, 199896-2641. In re Hitchcock.
Cuyahoga App. Nos. 69291 and 69292. On motion for stay of proceedings in appellate and probate courts. Motion denied.
RESNICK, J., dissents.
97-187. State ex rel. Strothers v. Wertheim.
Cuyahoga App. No. 71185. On motion to clarify court decision. Motion denied.
RESNICK, J., dissents.
97-1111. State v. Stojetz.
Madison C.P. No. 96CR10086. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Madison County. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion to remand to the trial court for in camera review of the trial transcript and motion to supplement the record,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to remand to the trial court for in camera review of the grand jury transcript be, and hereby is, denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the motion to supplement the record be, and hereby is, granted in part.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that, on or before April 11, 1998, in accordance with S.Ct.Prac.R. V(3), and this order, the clerk of the court of common pleas shall certify and transmit all portions of the record not previously transmitted to the Clerk of this court.
1. Original exhibits not needed in the trials of appellant’s co-defendants shall be certified and transmitted to the Clerk of this court.
2. Exhibits needed in the trials of appellant’s co-defendants shall be duplicated and the duplicates shall be certified and transmitted to the Clerk of this court in accordance with the procedures set forth below:
a. Copies of paper exhibits shall be made and transmitted;
b. A videotape shall be duplicated and transmitted;
c. Photographs of physical exhibits shall be made in the presence of counsel for both parties. The photographs shall be adequate substitutes for the evidence and shall be enlarged if necessary to ensure proper identification of the individual items. An index identifying the item(s) in each photograph shall be prepared. Counsel for appellee shall be responsible for providing the means of taking the photographs, developing the film, enlarging the photographs if necessary, preparing the index of the photographs, filing the photographs and index with the clerk of the court of common pleas, and serving a set of duplicate photographs and the index on opposing counsel. After counsel for appellant has had an opportunity to review the photographs and the index, and the clerk of the court of common pleas has determined that the photographs are sufficient substitutes for the original physical exhibits, the photographs shall be transmitted.
97-1530. State ex rel. Leister v. Shaw.
In Mandamus. On evidence and brief in support of request for attorney fees. Request for attorney fees denied.
97-2178. State v. Gawloski.
Cuyahoga App. No. 71659. On motion for relief from judgment and on request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. Motion and request denied.
Page 1470
97-2491. Mullins v. Rio Algom, Inc.
Certified State Law Question, No. C19773. On motion for leave to intervene by Attorney General Betty Montgomery. Motion granted.
97-2723. Johnson v. BP Chemicals, Inc.
Allen App. No. 1-97-32. On motion for stay of case No. 97-2491 Mullins v. Rio Algom, Inc., Certified State Law Question, No. C19773. Motion granted.
98-89. State ex rel. Orth v. Christiansen.
In Mandamus. Sua sponte, alternative writ granted.
DOUGLAS, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., dissent and would dismiss the cause.
98-94. Campanelli v. AT T Wireless Serv.
Stark App. Nos. 1997CA00109 and 1997CA00110. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue whether cellular telecommunication providers have public utility status for township zoning purposes. Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 98-46, infra.
F.E. SWEENEY and COOK, JJ., dissent.
RESNICK, J., not participating.
The conflict case is Adam v. Bath Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals
(July 23, 1997), Summit App. No. 18144, unreported, 1997 WL 423040.
98-98. In re Davis.
Paulding App. No. 11-97-6. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ Journal Entry filed December 24, 1997:
“On motion of the appellants to certify a conflict, the judges of this court find that the judgment in this case, upon which they have agreed, is in conflict with the judgment pronounced upon the same question by the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Appellate District in the case of In re [Omosun] Children (1995), 106 Ohio App.3d 813 [667 N.E.2d 431].
“The rule of law on which the conflict exists is whether the seven-day limit within which a juvenile court must enter its disposition of a child adjudicated as abused, neglected or dependent under R.C. 2151.35 also applies to motions filed by an agency under R.C. 2151.414 prior to the September 1996 amendment to that statute.”
Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 98-50, infra.
F.E. SWEENEY, J., dissents.
98-183. State v. Walker.
Lorain App. No. 97CA006958. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.
MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, J., dissent.
98-194. State v. Johnson.
Hamilton App. No. C-961099. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.
98-196. State v. Beatty.
Fairfield App. No. 95CA0068. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.
RESNICK and PFEIFER, JJ., dissent.
98-237. State v. Garczynski.
Wood App. No. WD-97-016. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; sua sponte, cause held for the decision in 97-1778, State v. Rush, Stark App. No. 96CA419; briefing schedule stayed.