Photo Illustration

WOODSFIELD — The Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral arguments in Monroe County for the first time on Wednesday.

The session begins at 9 a.m. at Monroe Central High School.

It’s the 84th installment of the Off-Site Court Program, which has taken the state’s highest court to communities around Ohio since it was established in 1987. During that time, 43,924 Ohioans – 34,929 of them students – have been able to personally observe the proceedings of the Supreme Court and interact with justices, attorneys and court staff, according to a post on Court News Ohio, from the court’s public information office.

Members of the Supreme Court staff have worked closely with local officials, educators and law enforcement over the past year to prepare for the event, according to the post.

Oral arguments at Off-Site Court are open to the public. Those unable to attend in person can view the livestream on the Supreme Court website, https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/, and on the Ohio Channel, https://ohiochannel.org/.

According to Court News Ohio, the following cases are scheduled for argument:

* State of Ohio v. Dorian L. Crawl. From the 2nd District Court of Appeals out of Montgomery County, the question in this case is whether non-threatening comments on social media posts can be considered conduct knowingly made to cause harm or distress in a stalking case if the individuals have no existing relationship and the poster never indicates the comments are unwanted or threatening.

* State of Ohio v. Edward Balmert. This case, from the 9th District Court of Appeals, involves an incident in Lorain County in which an Ohio State Highway Patrol trooper was injured after being struck by a vehicle driven by a man who admitted to using hemp products that morning. He was found guilty of aggravated vehicular assault and a charge of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, based on the level of marijuana metabolites found in his urine. The defendant has challenged the assault conviction because he was acquitted of another OVI charge that required proving actual impairment.

* State of Ohio v. Mamadou Diaw. This case, from the 10th District Court of Appeals and Franklin County, deals with a man indicted on charges of aggravated robbery and robbery challenging the use of evidence gained from a social media app and another company obtained via investigative subpoena instead of a search warrant.