[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. 

__________________