The next court that Johnny could request to hear his case is the Ohio Appellate Court, which is represented in the diagram by the rightmost section. The appellate court system of Ohio consists of 12 district courts of appeals plus a separate Supreme Court (1). The district courts are divided into sixteen districts, and each has its own individual rules and procedures governing appeals (2). Johnny’s case would be heard by one of these district courts, depending on where he originally filed his lawsuit.

Once an appeal is granted, there are several steps both parties must take before the actual hearing. Generally speaking, this includes filing briefs outlining their arguments and submitting any relevant documents or evidence needed to support their claims (3). After all of this paperwork has been submitted, it will then be reviewed by a three-judge panel who will then issue an opinion on whether or not to overturn the trial court’s decision – if they do decide to overturn it, they can either remand the case back down to the trial court or grant relief directly from their opinion (4).

If Johnny wishes to further appeal his case after being unsuccessful at the appellate level he may choose to bring forth a Writ Of Certiorari which requests that an even higher court review his decision; however since Ohio only has one supreme court this would likely be out of reach as far as options go for him as an appellant. He could also attempt to have his case brought up before another state’s supreme court but that too would require various filings and legal motions before such a move could be made in earnest(5).

In conclusion , if Johnny wishes to continue appealing his case after losing at trial he should first file for an appeal with one of Ohio’s twelve district courts represented by section seven on the diagram . Should he find himself unsuccessful here again then other more extreme measures such as filing writs may need to be taken into consideration .

References:
1) State v Sweeney 2011 ; 2) Tillery v State 2008 ; 3) In Re Palmer 2007 ; 4 )Diamond v United States 2009 ; 5) Clark et al 2015