Case Title: State v. Fawcett

Citation: 2000-Ohio-195

Docket Number: 19992074

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2000-12-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as State v. Fawcett, 91 Ohio St.3d 1, 2000-Ohio-195.] 
 
 
 
THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. FAWCETT, APPELLANT. 
[Cite as State v. Fawcett (2000), 91 Ohio St.3d 1.] 
Appellate procedure — Courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review judgments 
entered by those inferior courts located within the territorial boundaries 
of their appellate districts. 
(No. 99-2074 — Submitted November 14, 2000 — Decided December 28, 2000.) 
CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Wood County, No. WD-99-062. 
__________________ 
SYLLABUS OF THE COURT 
Courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review judgments entered by those inferior 
courts located within the territorial boundaries of their appellate districts. 
__________________ 
 
COOK, J.  In 1999, the Fostoria Municipal Court, which is located in 
Seneca County, Ohio, convicted and sentenced defendant-appellant, Steven A. 
Fawcett, of a misdemeanor offense.  Fawcett timely appealed to the Third District 
Court of Appeals. 
 
Because the crime of which Fawcett was convicted apparently took place 
in that portion of Fostoria, Ohio, that is located within Wood County, which is not 
within the Third Appellate District, the court of appeals dismissed Fawcett’s 
appeal without prejudice for a perceived lack of jurisdiction.  Fawcett then filed a 
motion to amend his notice of appeal in the Court of Appeals of the Sixth District, 
in which Wood County is located.  The Sixth District denied the motion and 
dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, reasoning that although the Fostoria 
Municipal Court has jurisdiction over a portion of Wood County, the appellate 
district in which a lower court is located determines jurisdiction over the appeal. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
The Sixth District certified that a conflict existed between its judgment 
and the judgment of the Third District in the same case.  The certifying court 
supported its certification by setting forth the issue of law upon which the two 
appellate courts differ.  It framed the conflict issue as follows: “Is the jurisdiction 
of an Ohio appellate district contingent upon the county where the trial court is 
located or upon the county where the incident which is the subject of the case 
occurred?”  This court agreed with the certifying court that a conflict exists and 
accepted jurisdiction of this appeal on that basis. 
 
This case presents the issue of whether one must look to the geographic 
location of the trial court or the geographic location of the wrongdoing to 
determine where to bring an appeal.  With this opinion we confirm that it is the 
geographic location of the trial court that determines the appropriate appellate 
court to have jurisdiction. 
 
The Ohio Constitution specifically confers appellate jurisdiction over 
inferior courts of record based upon the location of the lower court, and not upon 
the situs of the underlying cause of action.  Section 3(A), Article IV of the Ohio 
Constitution provides that “[t]he state shall be divided by law into compact 
appellate districts in each of which there shall be a court of appeals.”  The 
jurisdiction of an appellate district is then described in Section 3(B)(2), Article IV 
as follows: 
 
“Courts of appeals shall have such jurisdiction as may be provided by law 
to review and affirm, modify, or reverse judgments or final orders of the courts of 
record inferior to the court of appeals within the district.”  (Emphasis added.) 
 
Additionally, R.C. 2501.02 codifies the constitutional declaration that 
appellate jurisdiction is dependent upon the location of the inferior court of 
record: 
 
“In addition to the original jurisdiction conferred by Section 3 of Article 
IV, Ohio Constitution, the court [of appeals] shall have jurisdiction * * * to 
January Term, 2000 
3 
review * * * judgments or final orders of courts of record inferior to the court of 
appeals within the district.”  (Emphasis added.) 
 
Both the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions describe the 
jurisdiction of a court of appeals as dependent upon the location of the inferior 
court of record from which an order is being appealed.  Accordingly, we hold that 
courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review judgments entered by those inferior 
courts located within the territorial boundaries of their appellate districts.  See 
Heckler Co. v. Napoleon (1937), 56 Ohio App. 110, 118, 8 O.O. 171, 174, 10 
N.E.2d 32, 35 (holding that, under constitutional and statutory provisions 
analogous to Section 3, Article IV of the Ohio Constitution and R.C. 2501.02, 
“the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to review * * * judgments of the 
common pleas court is limited to common pleas courts within the appellate 
district”). 
 
Applying this holding to the instant case, we note that R.C. 1901.01(A) 
established the Fostoria Municipal Court.  That court has jurisdiction within the 
corporate limits of Fostoria, R.C. 1901.02(A), as well as “within Loudon and 
Jackson townships in Seneca county, within Washington township in Hancock 
county, and within Perry township in Wood county.”  R.C. 1901.02(B).  Although 
the General Assembly has established that Wood County is part of the Sixth 
Appellate District, R.C. 2501.01(F), the Fostoria Municipal Court itself is located 
in Seneca County, and Seneca County is part of the Third Appellate District.  R.C. 
2501.01(C).  Therefore, because the Fostoria Municipal Court is an inferior court 
of record sited in the Third District, we find that appellate jurisdiction properly 
rested with that district.  The judgment of the Sixth District is affirmed.1 
Judgment affirmed. 
                                                          
 
1.  Fawcett seeks on appeal for this court to reverse the dismissal of his appeal to the Third 
District.  The cause before this court is the certified conflict arising from the decision of the Sixth 
District, however, and not the decision of the Third District.  See Section 2(B)(2)(e), Article IV, 
Ohio Constitution. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
4 
 
MOYER, C.J., PATTON, F.E. SWEENEY and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., 
concur. 
 
PFEIFER, J., concurs separately. 
 
DOUGLAS, J., dissents. 
 
JOHN T. PATTON, J., of the Eighth Appellate District, sitting for RESNICK, 
J. 
__________________ 
 
PFEIFER, J., concurring.  This case is confusing because we generally 
associate venue with the situs of a crime.  However, appellate jurisdiction does 
not comport with our common understanding of venue; appellate jurisdiction is 
constitutionally grounded in the location of the lower court.  Section 3(B)(2), 
Article IV of the Ohio Constitution.  Therefore, even though Fostoria Municipal 
Court is the proper venue for crimes occurring in portions of three different 
counties (Wood, Hancock, and Seneca) and two different appellate districts (the 
Sixth and the Third), appellate jurisdiction of the decisions of the Fostoria 
Municipal Court is proper only in the Third Appellate District. 
__________________ 
 
Barbara Dibble, Fostoria Assistant City Prosecutor, for appellee. 
 
Kahler & Kahler Law Offices and Richard A. Kahler, for appellant. 
__________________