One defendant is in prison, another is on probation, and now prosecutors want to dismiss the charges against a third person involved in the Scioto County public corruption case.
The State of Ohio has filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss all charges against Lioubov Horton, the wife of former Scioto County Economic Development Director Robert Horton.
The September 18 motion marks a significant development in the case involving the Southern Ohio Port Authority, the SOAR Business Park and former Scioto County Commissioner Bryan Davis.
And the reason prosecutors are asking for the dismissal is particularly interesting.
The state now says it believes Lioubov Horton was following directions and didn’t understand enough about the financial transactions to be held criminally responsible.
That’s a major change from February 2025, when she was indicted on 12 felony charges in connection with the alleged public contracting and kickback scheme.
As of the latest court docket information reviewed by SCDN, however, the judge has not yet issued a ruling on the motion.
That means the charges have not officially been dismissed.
Prosecutors Say Lioubov Horton Didn’t Understand the Transactions
In the motion filed September 18, Special Prosecutor Samuel J. Kirk III explained that the state’s position changed after investigators conducted additional interviews and obtained more evidence.
Those interviews included conversations with both Robert and Lioubov Horton.
The prosecutor’s filing describes Lioubov Horton as a Russian immigrant and former concert pianist whose first language is not English.
According to the motion, she lacked experience with the financial arrangements at the center of the criminal case and did not sufficiently understand what was happening.
The state wrote:
“Based on the evidence known to the State, the State believes Lioubov E. Horton was directed and did not have sufficient knowledge required for culpability.”
In everyday language, prosecutors are saying that although her name and company were involved in the transactions, they now believe she was acting under someone else’s direction without the knowledge necessary to establish criminal guilt.
The state concluded that dismissing the charges would serve the interests of justice.
That’s quite a departure from the original indictment.
Originally Charged With 12 Felonies
When Robert and Lioubov Horton were indicted in February 2025, investigators alleged that hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal payments had been funneled through a company owned by Lioubov.
She faced 12 criminal counts, including engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, theft in office, telecommunications fraud, aggravated theft, money laundering, tampering with evidence and having an unlawful interest in a public contract.
Robert Horton faced 15 counts, including bribery, theft in office, aggravated theft, money laundering, tampering with public records and engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity.
The Auditor of State’s Office said its investigation uncovered a scheme involving payments made in exchange for public construction contracts. <Cite ref=”turn110557search2″/>
At the center of the allegations was a steel building project at the SOAR Business Park near the Greater Portsmouth Regional Airport.
Investigators alleged that Horton used his position to help secure construction contracts and that payments disguised as legitimate business commissions were actually kickbacks.
One company receiving payments was RPL Consulting, which was owned by Lioubov Horton.
The indictment treated her involvement in those transactions as criminal.
The September 18 motion indicates prosecutors have reconsidered that conclusion after reviewing additional evidence.
What Does Dismissal Without Prejudice Mean?
There’s an important detail in the state’s request.
Prosecutors are asking for the charges against Lioubov Horton to be dismissed without prejudice.
That means the case would be dismissed, but the state would not necessarily be permanently prohibited from bringing charges again if legally permitted.
It is different from an acquittal, where a defendant is found not guilty after a trial.
It also isn’t the same as a dismissal with prejudice, which generally prevents the same charges from being filed again.
For now, though, this is still only a request.
The judge must approve the dismissal before it becomes official.
Bryan Davis Is Already Serving His Prison Sentence
While the Horton case has moved slowly through the court system, the case against former Commissioner Bryan Davis has reached a very different point.
Davis and his wife, Lorinda “Lori” Davis, were indicted in August 2025.
Bryan initially faced 13 felony counts, including engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, theft in office, money laundering, aggravated theft, receiving stolen property, forgery, obstructing justice and filing fraudulent tax returns.
Lori faced 10 felony counts, including money laundering, tampering with evidence, receiving stolen property and related charges.
Prosecutors alleged that Davis used his elected position to help secure public funding and contracts connected to the scheme.
They also alleged that both wives received payments through consulting businesses they owned. <Cite ref=”turn110557search3″/>
In July 2026, Bryan Davis pleaded guilty to three felony charges:
- Theft in Office
- Receiving Stolen Property
- Filing an Incomplete, False or Fraudulent Tax Return
On September 16, Visiting Judge D. Dean Evans sentenced him to 30 months in prison.
Davis was also ordered to pay $67,808.67 in restitution to Scioto County, repay county salary received during his suspension, forfeit applicable government pension contributions and pay other court-related costs.
His felony conviction also prevents him from holding public office again. <Cite ref=”turn110557search0″/>
Davis entered the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction on October 5 and was initially assigned to the Correctional Reception Center in Orient.
State records listed his expected release date as March 16, 2029.
Lori Davis Received Probation Instead of Prison
Lori Davis also reached a plea agreement.
She pleaded guilty to one third-degree felony count of Tampering with Evidence.
At the September 16 sentencing hearing, she received two years of community control, commonly called probation, rather than a prison sentence.
She was also ordered to pay court costs and the applicable supervision fee.
Community control allows someone to remain outside prison under court-imposed conditions and supervision. Violating those conditions can result in additional penalties.
The remaining charges against both Davises were resolved through their plea agreements.
What About Robert Horton?
That leaves Robert Horton, the former director of Scioto County’s economic development operation and former head of the Southern Ohio Port Authority.
His case has been moving through Scioto County Common Pleas Court since February 2025.
He originally faced 15 criminal counts, including:
- Engaging in a Pattern of Corrupt Activity
- Theft in Office and Aggravated Theft
- Bribery
- Money Laundering
- Telecommunications Fraud
- Tampering With Public Records and Evidence
- Having an Unlawful Interest in a Public Contract
- Falsification
These remain allegations unless and until they are established through a guilty plea or court verdict.
Horton was originally scheduled for trial in July 2025, but that trial was postponed.
Since then, the court has held a series of status conferences without a new trial date being publicly established.
Another status conference was scheduled for September 16, the same day Bryan and Lori Davis were sentenced.
However, according to the docket information reviewed by SCDN, no outcome from that conference has yet been posted.
Did Robert Horton Make a Deal to Avoid Prison?
That’s another unanswered question.
When Bryan Davis asked the judge for leniency before his sentencing, his attorney filed a memorandum arguing that Robert Horton had reached an agreement to cooperate with the State of Ohio.
According to that memorandum, prosecutors had agreed to recommend community control for Horton in exchange for his cooperation.
Davis’s defense pointed to that reported arrangement while arguing that Davis should also receive probation rather than prison.
But there’s an important distinction.
The claim about Horton’s cooperation agreement appeared in Davis’s sentencing memorandum.
As of the latest docket information reviewed by SCDN, no corresponding agreement, guilty plea or sentencing decision confirming that arrangement has been publicly posted in Horton’s case.
And even if prosecutors agree to recommend community control, that doesn’t necessarily mean the judge must accept the recommendation.
So it would be premature to say Horton has received probation or that he definitely won’t go to prison.
What we do know is that the prosecution has now publicly acknowledged additional interviews with both Hortons and new evidence that led it to seek dismissal of Lioubov Horton’s charges.
The motion does not explain whether that evidence is connected to the cooperation arrangement described by Bryan Davis’s attorney.
Four Defendants, Very Different Outcomes
When the investigation began, prosecutors alleged that all four defendants had roles in a scheme to benefit from public contracts and conceal the transactions from investigators.
More than a year and a half after the first indictments, the picture looks very different.
Bryan Davis has pleaded guilty and begun serving a 30-month prison sentence.
Lori Davis has pleaded guilty and received two years of community control.
Prosecutors now want to dismiss all charges against Lioubov Horton because they say the evidence does not establish that she had the knowledge necessary for criminal responsibility.
And Robert Horton, whose alleged actions were at the center of the original investigation, still has no publicly confirmed final disposition in the docket information reviewed by SCDN.
The next developments to watch are whether the judge grants the motion to dismiss Lioubov Horton’s charges and whether the court posts additional information about Robert Horton’s September 16 status conference.
Until those decisions appear in the public record, important questions about the remaining case are still unanswered.
