[Cite as State v. Cunningham , 2021-Ohio-795.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO

STATE OF OHIO, : MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. 2021-P-0018 - vs - : ERIK A. CUNNINGHAM, : Defendant-Appellant. :

Criminal Appeal from the Portage County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2019 CR 00022.

Jud g ment: Appeal dismissed.

Victor V. Vigluicci , Portage County Prosecutor, 241 South Chestnut Street, Ravenna , OH 44266 ( For Plaintiff-Appellee )

. Donald J. Malarcik and John P. Stiles , 121 S. Main Street, Suite 520, Akron, OH 44308 ( Fo r Appellants )

.

MARY JANE TRAPP, P.J. {¶1} Appellant, Erik A. Cunningham, through counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal on February 12, 2021. The notice indicates that he appeals fro m a Januar y 14, 2021 judgment entry, but no entry is attached. Instead, he attaches an incomplete and uncertified copy of a transcript from a January 14, 2021 “Motio n to Suppress” hearing in2 the matter of State of Ohio v. Erik A. Cunningham , Case No. 2019 CR 00022, in the Portage County Court of Common Pleas. {¶2} Also attached to the Notice of Appeal is a copy of a “Motion fo r Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law” that appellant filed in Case No. 2019 CR 00022 on January 27, 2021. {¶3} Additionally, in a document captioned as “DESCRIPTION,” attache d to the notice, appellant indicates that the trial court overruled his written motion to appoint a special master to review privileged communications. However, t he trial court docket reflects that the court has not issued a written judgment entry to date reflecting the foregoing ruling. {¶4} The Ohio Constitution gives courts of appeals authority over fi nal orders of trial courts. Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section 3(B)(2). {¶5} Moreover, final orders must be in writing. Oral pronouncements by a trial court judge do not constitute final appealable orders because t hey are subject to revision before journalization. State ex. rel. Marshall v. Glavas , 98 Ohio St.3d 297, 2003-Ohio-857, 784 N.E.2d 97, ¶ 5. “‘A court of record speaks only through its journal and not by oral pronouncement or mere written minute or memoran dum.’” Id. , quoting Schenley v. Kauth , 160 Ohio St. 109, 113 N.E.2d 625 (1953), paragraph one of the syllabus. {¶6} Pursuant to R.C. 2953.02, a court of appeals only possesses jur isdiction to hear an appeal from a criminal case if the appeal is from a “judgment or final order.” {¶7} In addition, R.C. 2505.02(B) defines a final appealable order, in part, as the following:3 {¶8} “An order is a final order that may be reviewed, affirmed, modi fied, or reversed, with or without retrial, when it is one of the follow ing: {¶9} “(1) An order that affects a substantial right in an action tha t in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; {¶10} “(2) An order that affects a substantial right made in a specia l proceeding or upon a summary application in an action after judgment; {¶11} “(3) An order that vacates or sets aside a judgment or grants a new trial; {¶12} “(4) An order that grants or denies a provisional remedy and to which both of the following apply: {¶13} “(a) The order in effect determines the action with respect to the provisional remedy and prevents a judgment in the action in fav or of the appealing party with respect to the provisional remedy. {¶14} “(b) The appealing party would not be afforded a meaningful or effective remedy by an appeal following final judgment as to all proceedi ngs, issues, claims, and parties in the action.” R.C. 2505.02(B)(1)-(4). {¶15} Furthermore, the Supreme Court of Ohio has stated that “in a cr iminal case there must be a sentence which constitutes a judgment or a final order which amounts ‘to a disposition of the cause’ before there is a basis for appeal.” State v.

Chamberlain , 177 Ohio St. 104, 106-107, 202 N.E.2d 695 (1964), quoting State v. Bevacqua , 147 Ohio St. 20, 22, 67 N.E.2d 786 (1946). {¶16} Here, there is no disposition of the matter below, and the tria l court has merely made an oral pronouncement of a ruling during a hearing that is not a final4 appealable order since no judgment was filed and journalized. Glavas , supra , at ¶ 5;

see State ex rel. Hansen v. Reed , 63 Ohio St.3d 597, 600, 589 N.E.2d 1324 (1992). {¶17} The trial court docket reflects a pending Crim.R. 12(F) motion filed by appellant before his Notice of Appeal was filed requesting that the trial court state its findings regarding certain motions. No findings have been issu ed. {¶18} Simply put, without a judgment entry, this court is without jur isdiction to consider this appeal. {¶19} Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdi ction.

THOMAS R. WRIGHT, J., MATT LYNCH, J.,

concur.