State v. Ross, 943 N.E.2d 992

Ross was indicted in Summit County for kidnapping, rape, murder, and aggravated murder, with two aggravating circumstances making him death-penalty eligible.
During trial, the court granted Crim.R. 29(A) acquittals for kidnapping and related death-penalty specs; after evidence, remaining charges were denied under Crim.R. 29(A).
A mistrial occurred due to juror misconduct; jury discharged October 28, 2000.
Within 14 days after discharge, Ross renewed his Crim.R. 29(C) motion for acquittal on remaining charges; a new judge took over and the court dismissed on double jeopardy but did not resolve all other motions.
In 2003, the common pleas court denied Ross’s original timely Crim.R. 29(C) motion; Ross later filed a September 2003 supplemental filing and a November 2003 renewed motion for acquittal.
The trial court later granted acquittal on the rape charge and death specification, which the state appealed, and the Ninth District held the denial could be reconsidered; the Ohio Supreme Court addressed whether renewals outside the 14-day window are permitted under Crim.R. 29(C).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a trial court may reconsider a timely Crim.R. 29(C) denial based on a renewal filed after 14 days.	State argues the postdeadline renewal should be considered; the initial denial was interlocutory and subject to revision.	Ross argues reconsideration of a timely denial was permissible as an interlocutory ruling.	No; the renewal filed after 14 days is untimely and cannot justify reconsideration; the trial court erred.

Yates v. Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, 32 Ohio St.3d 30 (1987) (acquittal under Crim.R. 29(C) is a final verdict not appealable by the state)
Bistricky v. State, 51 Ohio St.3d 157 (1990) (allows discretionary appeal of certain substantive law rulings underlying an acquittal when the verdict is not appealed)
Keeton, 18 Ohio St.3d 379 (1985) (directed verdict of acquittal is a final verdict not appealable by the state)
Arnett, 22 Ohio St.3d 186 (1986) (recognizes appealability of certain evidentiary rulings under R.C. 2945.67(A)"} ,{)