In re: B.J.
Quote from Judge Myers' Opinion:
Both mother and maternal grandfather have appealed the trial court’s entry granting permanent custody of B.J. to the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (“HCJFS”). Because we find that the trial court’s determination that a grant of permanent custody was in B.J.’s best interest was not supported by sufficient evidence, we reverse the trial court’s judgment.
HCJFS filed a complaint seeking temporary custody of B.J. on June 11, 2018, several days after B.J.’s birth. The agency was awarded an interim order of temporary custody pending a full hearing on the complaint, and B.J. was placed in a foster home. An amended complaint for temporary custody was filed on June 22, 2018, alleging that B.J. was abused and dependent and that mother had severe mental-health issues and posed a threat to B.J.
On July 10, 2018, a juvenile court magistrate issued an order directing that a home study be completed on maternal grandfather, who resided in Nebraska, pursuant to the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (“ICPC”). The initial case plan for B.J. filed by HCJFS indicated that maternal grandfather had been in contact with the agency and was willing to work with ICPC to take placement of B.J
In re: R.A.D., R.H.D., R.C.1, R.C.2, and R.C.3
Quote from Judge Zayas' Opinion:
The Hamilton County Juvenile Court granted permanent custody of five children to the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (“HCJFS”) and denied custody petitions filed by various relatives. The mother of the children, two of the fathers of the children, and two custody petitioners have appealed the juvenile court’s decision. We find no merit in their assignments of error, and we affirm the juvenile court’s judgment.
Appellant mother has five children. The oldest child is R.A.D., who was born on February 11, 2011. Her father is appellant T.F.1. The second-oldest child is R.H.D., who was born on October 4, 2015. Her father is S.H. The other three children are R.C.1, R.C.2 and R.C.3, born on January 26, 2016, January 8, 2017, and December 9, 2017, respectively. Their father is appellant D.C.
The record shows that HCJFS received interim custody of the four oldest children through an ex parte emergency order on May 22, 2017. HCJFS had alleged that the children were removed from the home due to an ongoing pattern of domestic violence between mother and D.C., which had occurred in the presence of the children. Additionally it alleged that R.C.1 had ingested opioids at the home while in the care of D.C., and had to be revived with Narcan and hospitalized. D.C. had fled the scene because he had outstanding warrants. The following day, the court granted interim custody to HCJFS based on the agreement of the parties. Subsequently, all four children were found to be neglected and dependent. R.C.1 was also found to be abused. The juvenile court granted temporary custody of those four children to HCJFS.
State of Ohio v. Diovantae Harris
Quote from Judge Bergeron's Opinion:
After using a firearm to rob a victim, the perpetrator—presumably unaware that the police were searching for him—sent a text message to the victim offering to sell her cheap drugs. Police capitalized on this blunder to orchestrate a controlled drug buy, which culminated in the arrest of Defendant-Appellant Diovantae Harris. Mr. Harris now appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery and having weapons under a disability. We, however, find no merit in his assignments of error and affirm the judgment below.
On New Year’s Eve, 2018, Jennifer Raisor—who identified herself at trial as a prostitute—arranged to rendezvous with a new Cincinnati client who responded to one of her online ads. She agreed to meet the client at 2417 Sunny Hill Drive, also known as Fay Apartments. When Ms. Raisor first arrived at the address, she could not locate her client, so she drove away. An ensuing telephone call by her client, however, lured her back.
State of Ohio v. Roger Jones
Quote from Judge Bergeron's Opinion:
Defendant-Appellant Roger Jones concedes that the record reveals no error in the trial court’s acceptance of his guilty plea, but he entreats us to venture beyond the record in order to reverse his conviction. We decline the invitation to do so, and we accordingly affirm the judgment of the trial court.
In January 2019, Mr. Jones and another individual became involved in a physical altercation with Franklin Thompson, which defense counsel described as a “drug deal gone bad.” As a result of the melee, Mr. Thompson suffered a broken jaw, orbital, and hand, which resulted in charges of aggravated robbery and felonious assault against Mr. Jones. Before Mr. Jones’s trial date, the court ordered a competency evaluation, and Mr. Jones was found competent to stand trial. The state then broached a plea deal: Mr. Jones could plead guilty to the felonious assault charge in exchange for dismissal of the aggravated robbery charge.