State v. Matthews, 2021 Ohio 3556

Defendant John R. Matthews was charged (Nov. 2019) with violating Ohio Rev. Code §3505.08 for allegedly distributing a sample ballot.
The complaint alleged only that Matthews “did distribute a sample ballot,” but did not allege he was a political party or a candidate—the language §3505.08 restricts.
Matthews moved to dismiss, arguing the complaint omitted an essential element, that §3505.08 conflicted with the more specific §3517.20 (requiring Ohio Elections Commission involvement), and that the statute violated free-speech and equal-protection rights.
The trial court granted the motion to dismiss (Mar. 10, 2021), concluding the complaint was defective for omitting the allegation that Matthews was a political party or candidate.
The State appealed, raising two issues: (1) whether the dismissal is a final appealable order (State argued it was without prejudice and not final), and (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to sua sponte permit amendment of the complaint.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the dismissal is a final appealable order	State: dismissal must be without prejudice, so not final	Matthews: dismissal is appealable	Court: State may appeal dismissals whether with or without prejudice (State v. Craig); order is final and appealable
Whether trial court erred by failing to sua sponte allow amendment	State: court should have allowed amendment to cure defect	Matthews: State never requested amendment; dismissal appropriate	Court: no abuse of discretion; State never sought amendment, so court not required to sua sponte permit one

State v. Craig, 116 Ohio St.3d 135 (2007) (state may appeal dismissal whether with or without prejudice)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (defining abuse-of-discretion standard)