Jump To

Top Caption Syllabus Combined Opinion The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 9, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

State v. Jordan

Ohio Court of Appeals

• Citations: 2026 Ohio 782
• Docket Number: 2025-L-054

• Judges: Lucci

• Opinion

• Authorities (4)

• Cited By (0)

• Summaries (0)

• Similar Cases (0)

• PDF

Syllabus

CRIMINAL LAW - having weapons under disability; possession of cocaine; misdemeanor soliciting; no sentence entered on soliciting guilty verdict; no final judgment; manifest weight of the evidence; soliciting verdict is only argument on appeal; no objection to failure to sentence; no final appealable order.

Combined Opinion

[Cite as State v. Jordan, 2026-Ohio-782.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
LAKE COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 2025-L-054

Plaintiff-Appellee,
Criminal Appeal from the
- vs - Court of Common Pleas

OSHAY LOPAT JORDAN,
Trial Court No. 2024 CR 000834
Defendant-Appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

Decided: March 9, 2026
Judgment: Appeal dismissed

Charles E. Coulson, Lake County Prosecutor, and Teri R. Daniel, Assistant Prosecutor,
Lake County Administration Building, 105 Main Street, P.O. Box 490, Painesville, OH
44077 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Allison F. Hibbard, 4403 St. Clair Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44103 (For Defendant-
Appellant).

EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.

{¶1} Appellant, Oshay Lopat Jordan, appeals the judgment of the Lake County

Court of Common Pleas convicting him of one count of having weapons under disability,

a felony of the third degree, and one count of possession of cocaine, a felony of the fifth

degree. Each count carried a forfeiture specification. The appeal is dismissed for lack of

a final, appealable order.

{¶2} Police responded to multiple 911 calls reporting a disturbance at Jordan’s

Willoughby apartment involving a dispute over money allegedly transferred via a cash

application on Jordan's phone. Both Jordan and Destiny Thomas, one of the individuals
involved, contacted police. Upon arrival, officers encountered Thomas and Keshawnda

Lewis-Gunnell, whom the evidence established were engaged in prostitution, at the

scene. All three individuals were arrested. A subsequent search of Jordan’s apartment

yielded a firearm and suspected crack cocaine.

{¶3} In November 2024, Jordan was indicted on one count of having weapons

under disability, in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), a felony of the third degree (with a

forfeiture specification, as set forth in R.C. 2941.1417 and R.C. 2981.04); one count of

having weapons under disability, in violation of R.C. 2923.13(A)(3), a felony of the third

degree (with a forfeiture specification, as set forth in R.C. 2941.1417 and R.C. 2981.04);

one count of possession of cocaine, a felony of the fifth degree, in violation of R.C.

2925.11 (with a forfeiture specification, as set forth in R.C. 2941.1417 and R.C. 2981.04);

one count of resisting arrest, in violation of R.C. 2921.33(B), a misdemeanor of the first

degree; one count of obstructing official business, in violation of R.C. 2921.31(A), a

misdemeanor of the second degree; and one count of soliciting, in violation of R.C.

2907.24(A), a misdemeanor of the third degree.

{¶4} Jordan pleaded not guilty to the charges, and the matter proceeded to jury

trial. Prior to trial, Jordan moved to represent himself and, after a thorough hearing relating

to his waiver of his right to counsel, the trial court granted the motion. His former attorney

was designated “standby counsel” for purposes of trial. Further, the State moved to

dismiss the resisting arrest and obstructing official business charges, which the trial court

granted.1

1. Although the point is procedurally subtle, the trial court’s judgment entry indicates that the State dismissed the resisting arrest and obstructing counts. According to the criminal rules and Ohio statute, however, a dismissal is only effective with the court’s approval. A prosecutor must have leave of court before an indictment will be dismissed. Crim.R. 48(A). Further, R.C. 2941.33 provides: “The prosecuting PAGE 2 OF 5

Case No. 2025-L-054
{¶5} Trial commenced and the jury found Jordan guilty on the remaining counts.

After a sentencing hearing, the trial court merged the two weapons under disability counts

and sentenced Jordan on one such count as well as the possession of cocaine count.

The trial court did not enter sentence on the soliciting count. Jordan was ordered to serve

four years community control with 10 days of local incarceration and credit for the 10 days

served. Jordan filed a notice of appeal. After he filed his merit brief, the State moved to

dismiss the matter. The State subsequently filed its brief. Jordan assigns the following as

error:

{¶6} “Appellant’s conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence;

therefore, his conviction is in violation of the Ohio state constitution and the Sixth and

Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”

{¶7} Jordan’s sole assignment of error challenges the weight of the evidence

relating only to the jury’s guilty verdict on the soliciting charge. Jordan, however, was not

convicted of soliciting, and therefore the verdict is not a final, appealable order.

{¶8} This court’s appellate jurisdiction is limited to reviewing judgments and

orders that are final, appealable orders. See Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section

3(B)(2). “In the absence of a final, appealable order, an appellate court does not

have jurisdiction to review the matter and must dismiss the appeal.” State v. Parks, 2023-

Ohio-3310, ¶ 5 (11th Dist.). Crim.R. 32(C) sets forth what must be contained in a

judgment of conviction for it to be valid; it provides, in part, that “[a] judgment of conviction

attorney shall not enter a nolle prosequi in any cause without leave of the court, on good cause shown, in
open court. A nolle prosequi entered contrary to this section is invalid.” Accordingly, the trial court must
approve the voluntary dismissal by the State. “These rules and statutes have been promulgated and
enacted in order to curb abuses of executive prerogative.” State v. Mucci, 2002-Ohio-6896, ¶ 27 (7th Dist.).
Here, the trial court approved of the State’s dismissal of the counts and therefore the proceedings complied
with the law.

PAGE 3 OF 5

Case No. 2025-L-054
shall set forth the fact of conviction and the sentence” and that “[t]he judge shall sign the

judgment and the clerk shall enter it on the journal.” Accordingly, the Supreme Court of

Ohio has held that “[a] judgment of conviction is a final order subject to appeal under R.C.

2505.02 when it sets forth (1) the fact of the conviction, (2) the sentence, (3) the judge’s

signature, and (4) the time stamp indicating the entry upon the journal by the clerk.” State

v. Lester, 2011-Ohio-5204, paragraph one of the syllabus. See also State v. Carlisle,

2011-Ohio-6553, ¶ 11 (a judgment of conviction is final when it meets each of the

requirements of Crim.R. 32(C)). As it pertains to this matter, “‘[f]inal judgment in a criminal

case means sentence. The sentence is the judgment.’” State v. Chamberlain, 177 Ohio

St. 104, 106 (1964), quoting Berman v. United States, 302 U.S. 211, 212 (1937); see also

State v. Thompson, 2018-Ohio-4177, ¶ 13 (11th Dist.).

{¶9} No sentence was entered on the solicitation guilty verdict. Neither the record

of the sentencing hearing nor the judgment entry suggests the trial court ordered a

sentence on the verdict. No objection was entered on this point. Because Jordan has not

been sentenced on the solicitation count, the appeal was not taken from a final order, and

this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The State’s motion to dismiss is

accordingly granted.

{¶10} Mr. Jordan’s appeal is dismissed.

JOHN J. EKLUND, J.,

SCOTT LYNCH, J.,

concur.

PAGE 4 OF 5

Case No. 2025-L-054
JUDGMENT ENTRY

For the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of this court, it is ordered that

appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Costs to be taxed against appellant.

JUDGE EUGENE A. LUCCI

JUDGE JOHN J. EKLUND,
concurs

JUDGE SCOTT LYNCH,
concurs

THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY

A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure.

PAGE 5 OF 5

Case No. 2025-L-054