2020 Ohio 379
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Christopher Graham, a Cleveland police officer, arrested an alleged victim on September 12, 2017; the county prosecutor later dismissed the underlying charge.
- Graham was criminally charged in Cleveland Municipal Court with two misdemeanors: assault and unlawful restraint arising from that arrest.
- Graham moved to dismiss the criminal charges on the basis of common-law qualified immunity; the trial court held a hearing and denied the motion.
- Graham appealed the denial; this court sua sponte requested briefing on whether a denial of a motion to dismiss based on common-law qualified immunity is a final, appealable order.
- The court analyzed two possible bases for interlocutory appeal: R.C. 2505.02(B)(4) (provisional remedy/final order) and R.C. 2744.02(C) (denial of political‑subdivision immunity).
- The court concluded the denial was not a final, appealable order under either statutory provision and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of motion to dismiss on common‑law qualified immunity is a "final order" under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4) (provisional remedy) | City: denial is not a provisional remedy; appeal should wait until final judgment | Graham: qualified‑immunity denial is effectively interlocutory and should be immediately appealable under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4) | Denial is not a provisional remedy under R.C. 2505.02 and therefore not a final order eligible for interlocutory appeal |
| Whether R.C. 2744.02(C) (orders denying political‑subdivision immunity are final) makes the denial appealable | City: R.C. 2744 applies to civil liability and thus does not govern criminal prosecutions | Graham: R.C. 2744.02(C) or its "any other provision of the law" language permits immediate appeal of immunity denials | R.C. 2744.02(C) applies to civil actions; it does not render a denial of common‑law immunity in a criminal prosecution a final, appealable order |
| Whether the phrase "any other provision of the law" in R.C. 2744 covers common‑law qualified immunity and permits interlocutory review | City: definition of "law" in R.C. 2744 excludes the common law when used with that term; thus it does not apply | Graham: "any other provision of the law" encompasses other immunity doctrines including common‑law qualified immunity | The statutory definition of "law" in R.C. 2744.01(D) excludes the common law in that context; common‑law immunity does not fall within the statutory interlocutory‑appeal exception |
Key Cases Cited
- Hubbell v. Xenia, 115 Ohio St.3d 77 (2007) (appellate courts lack jurisdiction to review nonfinal orders; finality requirement).
- Lakewood v. Pfeifer, 83 Ohio App.3d 47 (1992) (order denying motion to dismiss is generally not a final, appealable order).
- State v. Eberhardt, 56 Ohio App.2d 193 (1978) (in criminal context, denial of motion to dismiss is not final).
- Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995) (federal collateral‑order doctrine allows immediate appeal of certain immunity decisions in federal courts).
- Summerville v. Forest Park, 128 Ohio St.3d 221 (2010) (R.C. 2744.02(C) designed to permit interlocutory review of civil immunity denials to protect fiscal integrity and avoid unnecessary litigation).
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (qualified immunity is immunity from suit, not merely a defense; erroneous denial can require interlocutory review).
- State v. White, 988 N.E.2d 595 (2013) (qualified‑immunity issues in criminal prosecutions are rarely addressed; court did not reach the defense post‑verdict).