claim of plain error in Ohio

2026See Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv) (“Except for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion . . . unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).”). {¶8} The overturning of a judgment based on plain error “is not favored” and should occur “only in the extremely rare case involving exceptional circumstances where error, to which no objection was made at the trial court, seriously affects the basic fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial process.” Goldf

2025Pursuant to Juv.R. 40(D)(4)(c), “[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion . . . unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b).” 32. {¶ 83} The plain error standard of review was set forth in Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (1997), syllabus: In appeals of civil cases, the plain error doctrine is not favored and may be applied only in the extremely rare case involving exceptional circumstances where error, to which no objection was made a

2020Summit Nos. 23955 and 23959, 2008-Ohio-2432, ¶ 33 (“[T]his Court will not construct a claim of plain error on behalf of an appellant who fails to raise such an argument in her [or his] brief.”).

2019Summit Nos. 23955 and 23959, 2008-Ohio-2432, ¶ 33 (“[T]his Court will not construct a claim of plain error on behalf of an appellant who fails to raise such an argument in her brief.”).

2026See State v. Patton, 2021-Ohio-295, ¶ 25 (1st Dist.) (explaining that an appellate court “will not construct a claim of plain error on a defendant’s behalf if the defendant fails 8 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS to argue plain error on appeal”).

2026“This court consistently holds that we ‘need not analyze plain error when appellant has failed to make a plain[] error argument.’” State v. Jones, 2025-Ohio-3252, ¶ 12 (1st Dist.); State v. Patton, 2021-Ohio-295, ¶ 25 (1st Dist.) (Explaining that an appellate court “will not construct a claim of plain error on a defendant’s behalf if the defendant fails to argue plain error on appeal.”). {¶14} Additionally, statements made to a social worker with the Mayerson Center for the purposes of medical diagnosis and treatment are an exception to the hearsay rule under Evid.R. 803(4).

2011To prevail on a claim of plain error, Mr. Fite would have to show that, “but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St. 3d 516, 532 (2001) (quoting State v. Campbell, 69 Ohio St. 3d 38, 41 (1994)). {¶37} Mr. Fite has not argued that any jurors showed or discussed proposed questions with each other, nor has he argued how, but for the trial court’s failure to give the instruction, the outcome of his trial would have been different.

2011In order to prevail on a claim of plain error, the defendant must show that, “but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St. 3d 516, 532 (2001) (quoting State v. Campbell, 69 Ohio St. 3d 38, 41 (1994)). {¶15} Mr. Capers has not made such a showing in this case.

2011To prevail on a claim of plain error, Mr. Fite would have to show that, “but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St. 3d 516, 532 (2001) (quoting State v. Campbell, 69 Ohio St. 3d 38, 41 (1994)). {¶37} Mr. Fite has not argued that any jurors showed or discussed proposed questions with each other, nor has he argued how, but for the trial court’s failure to give the instruction, the outcome of his trial would have been different.

2011In order to prevail on a claim of plain error, the defendant must show that, “but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St. 3d 516, 532 (2001) (quoting State v. Campbell, 69 Ohio St. 3d 38, 41 (1994)). {¶15} Mr. Capers has not made such a showing in this case.

2020Therefore, “[w]hen a party fails to raise an issue in the party’s objections to the magistrate’s decision, it may not be raised for the first time on appeal.” Varner v. Varner, 170 Ohio App.3d 448 , 2007-Ohio-675, ¶ 22 (9th Dist.). {¶11} Father failed to challenge the admissibility of any evidence in his objections.

2020Therefore, “[w]hen a party fails to raise an issue in the party’s objections to the magistrate’s decision, it may not be raised for the first time on appeal.” Varner v. Varner, 170 Ohio App.3d 448 , 2007-Ohio-675, ¶ 22 (9th Dist.). {¶11} Father failed to challenge the admissibility of any evidence in his objections.

2016Muhammad v. State, 133 Ohio St.3d 508 , 2012-Ohio-4767 , 979 N.E.2d 296, ¶ 3 (appellant waived claim on appeal by failing to specifically raise claim in his objections to the magistrate’s decision in the trial court). {¶21} “Except for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion, whether or not specifically designated as a finding of fact or conclusion of law under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(a)(ii), unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).” Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv).

2016Muhammad v. State, 133 Ohio St.3d 508 , 2012-Ohio-4767 , 979 N.E.2d 296, ¶ 3 (appellant waived claim on appeal by failing to specifically raise claim in his objections to the magistrate’s decision in the trial court). {¶21} “Except for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion, whether or not specifically designated as a finding of fact or conclusion of law under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(a)(ii), unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).” Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv).

2023Cuyahoga No. 108541, 2020-Ohio-1609, ¶ 87 (“We need not, sua sponte, consider a claim of plain error that the appellant has not argued on appeal.”); Coleman v. Coleman, 9th Dist.

2022Cuyahoga No. 108541, 2020-Ohio-1609, ¶ 87 (“We need not, sua sponte, consider a claim of plain error that the appellant has not argued on appeal.”), citing Katie L. v. Dennis M., 9th Dist.

2023Pursuant to Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv), “[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion, whether or not specifically designated as a finding of fact or conclusion of law under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(a)(ii), unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).” “The burden of demonstrating plain error is on the party asserting it.” State v. Quarterman, 140 Ohio St.3d 464 , 2014-Ohio-4034 , 19 N.E.3d 900, ¶ 16 , citing State v. Payne, 114 Ohio St.3d 502 , 2007-Ohio-464

2023See State v. Payne, 114 Ohio St.3d 502 , 2007-Ohio-4642 , ¶ 23 (holding a failure to preserve an objection forfeits all claims other than a claim of plain error under Crim.R. 52(B)).

2021Our plain error analysis of Crim.R. 52(B) will not warrant a reversal of appellant’s convictions unless appellant establishes “that the outcome of the trial would clearly have been different but for the trial court’s plain error.” State v. Waddell, 75 Ohio St.3d 163, 166 , 661 N.E.2d 1043 (1996), citing Moreland at 63 . 19. {¶ 37} We reviewed the record and do not find appellant points to evidence supporting the first and second elements for a claim of plain error.

2021Our plain error analysis of Crim.R. 52(B) will not warrant a reversal of appellant’s convictions unless appellant establishes “that the outcome of the trial would clearly have been different but for the trial court’s plain error.” State v. Waddell, 75 Ohio St.3d 163, 166 , 661 N.E.2d 1043 (1996), citing Moreland at 63 . 19. {¶ 37} We reviewed the record and do not find appellant points to evidence supporting the first and second elements for a claim of plain error.

2015To prevail on a claim of plain error, an appellant “must show that an error occurred, that the error was plain, and that but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Mammone, 139 Ohio St.3d 467 , 2014-Ohio-1942 , 13 N.E.3d 1051, ¶ 69 (emphasis added). {¶ 9} Assuming that Thomas, in the case before us, can succeed in showing that the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress, and that this error was plain, he cannot show prejudice.

2015To prevail on a claim of plain error, an appellant “must show that an error occurred, that the error was plain, and that but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise.” State v. Mammone, 139 Ohio St.3d 467 , 2014-Ohio-1942 , 13 N.E.3d 1051, ¶ 69 (emphasis added). {¶ 9} Assuming that Thomas, in the case before us, can succeed in showing that the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress, and that this error was plain, he cannot show prejudice.

2026State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 , 27 (2002).

2020Crim.R. 52(B); State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 27 , 759 N.E.2d 1240 (2002); State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 , 2015-Ohio-2459 , 38 N.E.3d 860, ¶ 22 . 4 OHIO F IRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS {¶10} Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), governs the admissibility of inculpatory statements made by a nontestifying codefendant.

2022Because the legal custody motion was originally decided by a magistrate, to preserve this issue for appellate review, Father was required to comply with the requirements of Juv.R. 40(D). {¶11} Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b)(iv) provides, in relevant part, that “[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion * * * unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b).” The waiver rule of Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b)(iv) “embodies the long-recognized principle that the failure to d

2012Under Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b)(iv), “[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion, whether or not specifically designated as a finding of fact or conclusion of law under Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(a)(ii), unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b).” This “embodies the long-recognized principle that the failure to draw the trial court’s attention to possible error when the error could have been corrected results in a waiver of the issue for purposes of appeal.” I

2025“This rule is ‘“based on the principle that a trial court should 3 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS have a chance to correct or avoid a mistake before its decision is subject to scrutiny by a reviewing court.”’” Id., quoting Barnett v. Barnett, 2008-Ohio-3415, ¶ 16 (4th Dist.). {¶10} “Plain errors are errors in the judicial process that are clearly apparent on the face of the record and are prejudicial to the appellant.” Id. at ¶ 14, citing Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Lundeen, 2020-Ohio-28, ¶ 11 (8th Dist.).

2025Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iv) provides, “Except for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion * * * unless that party had objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).” “Thus, when a party fails to properly object to a magistrate’s decision in accordance with Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b), it generally forfeits the right to assign those issues as errors on appeal.” Marrs v. Mickel, 2023-Ohio-4528, ¶ 12 (8th Dist.), citing U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Matthews, 2017-Ohio-4075 , ¶ 14 (8th Dist.).

2022CA2018-06-124 and CA2018-06- 125, 2019-Ohio-3716, ¶ 14 , quoting Schade v. Carnegie Body Co., 70 Ohio St.2d 207, 209 (1982). "[W]here a party fails to expressly raise a claim of plain error on appeal, we need - 17 - Warren CA2022-06-046 CA2022-06-047 CA2022-06-048 CA2022-06-049 not consider whether plain error exists." In re A.V., 2021-Ohio-3878 at ¶ 35 , citing In re K.P.R., 197 Ohio App.3d 193 , 2011-Ohio-6114 , ¶ 10 (12th Dist.).

2016Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b)(iv) provides that "[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court's adoption of any -9- Butler CA2015-08-143 factual finding or legal conclusion * * * unless the party has objected to that finding as required by Juv.R. 40(D)(3)(b)." This court has previously ruled that "unless the appellant argues a 'claim of plain error,' the appellant has waived the claimed errors not objected to below." In re L.K. at ¶ 16; In re K.P.R., 197 Ohio App.3d 193 , 2011-Ohio-6114 , ¶ 10 (12th Dist.). {¶ 33} Here, although Father filed an objection to t

2025To prevail on a claim of plain error, it must be shown “that there was an error, that the error was plain or obvious, that but for the error the outcome of the proceeding would have been otherwise, and that reversal must be necessary to correct a manifest miscarriage of justice.” State v. Buttery, 2020-Ohio-2998 , ¶ 7, citing State v. Quarterman, 2014-Ohio-4034 .

2025To prevail on a claim of plain error, it must be shown “that there was an error, that the error was plain or obvious, that but for the error the outcome of the proceeding would have been otherwise, and that reversal must be necessary to correct a manifest miscarriage of justice.” State v. Buttery, 2020-Ohio- 2998, ¶ 7, citing State v. Quarterman, 2014-Ohio-4034, ¶ 16 .

2022CA2018-06-124 and CA2018-06- 125, 2019-Ohio-3716, ¶ 14 , quoting Schade v. Carnegie Body Co., 70 Ohio St.2d 207, 209 (1982). "[W]here a party fails to expressly raise a claim of plain error on appeal, we need - 17 - Warren CA2022-06-046 CA2022-06-047 CA2022-06-048 CA2022-06-049 not consider whether plain error exists." In re A.V., 2021-Ohio-3878 at ¶ 35 , citing In re K.P.R., 197 Ohio App.3d 193 , 2011-Ohio-6114 , ¶ 10 (12th Dist.).

2012Thus, the trial court overruled AHM’s motion for pre-judgment interest. {¶47} Civil Rule 53(D)(3)(b)(iv) provides that if a party fails to file a timely objection to the magistrate’s decision, “[e]xcept for a claim of plain error, a party shall not assign as error on appeal the court’s adoption of any factual finding or legal conclusion, whether or not specifically designated as a finding of fact or -26- Case No. 5-11-27 conclusion of law under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(a)(ii), unless the party has objected to that finding or conclusion as required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b).” {¶48} The Ohio Supreme Court ha

2026Although Mr. Noel 7 has attempted to raise plain error in his reply brief, “‘an appellant may not assert a claim of plain error for the first time in a reply brief.’” State v. Andrews, 2020-Ohio-2703, ¶ 51 (9th Dist.), quoting State v. Irvine, 2019-Ohio-959, fn. 1 (9th Dist.). {¶21} Even if Mr. Noel had presented a plain error argument on appeal, there is no showing on the record of “an error, i.e., a deviation from the legal rule” during the trial testimony of Ms. Horst.

2023Summit No. 28998, 2019-Ohio-959, fn.1 .

2025“If a defendant fails to renew his Crim.R. 14 motion, he forfeits the issue on appeal, all but for a claim of plain error.” State v. Rice, 2016-Ohio-8443, ¶ 12 (9th Dist.), citing State v. Garcia, 2016-Ohio-4667, ¶ 14 (9th Dist.). {¶16} “Notice of plain error . . . is to be taken with the utmost caution, under exceptional circumstances and only to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice.” State v. Gordon, 2018-Ohio- 259, ¶ 23, quoting State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (1978), paragraph three of the syllabus.

2016However, Mr. Rice has not argued plain error on appeal. “[T]his Court will not construct a claim of plain error on [Mr. Rice’s] behalf if [he] fails to argue plain error on appeal.” (Internal quotations and citations omitted.) See Id.