State v. Gaines (1989)
green
· 274 citation events
across 6 courts.
Showing the 16 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198920072026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Harry L. Coontz v. Norris W. McMackin Supt. (1993)
Proof of a firearm specification now requires proof "that the firearm was operable or could readily have been rendered operable at the time of the offense." State v. Gaines, 545 N.E.2d 68, 71 (Ohio 1989).
green
State v. Elliott (2022)
See State v. Gaines, 46 Ohio St.3d 65, 69 , 545 N.E.2d 68, 72 (1989) (“[T]here must be some evidence relative to the gun’s operability.”) {¶52} To establish a firearm specification, “the state need not produce the actual firearm.” Staten at ¶ 11.
“[T]here must be some evidence relative to the gun’s operability.”
green
State v. Berry (2024)
This evidence establishes the essential elements of the crime of felonious assault under R.C. 2903.11(A)(2) in that a firearm used as a bludgeon is “capable of inflicting death.” See State v. Gaines, 46 Ohio St.3d 65, 68 , 545 N.E.2d 68, 71 (1989); State v. Jackson, 92 Ohio St.3d 436, 440 , 751 N.E.2d 946, 955 (2001).
green
State v. Hollie (2022)
State v. Gaines, 46 Ohio St.3d 65, 68 (1989), modified on other grounds by State v. Murphy, 49 Ohio St.3d 206, 210 , (1990).
green
State v. Hunter (2018)
Summit No. 14231, 1990 Ohio App. LEXIS 931 (March 14, 1990) (stating that the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v. Gaines, 46 Ohio St.3d 65, 69 (1989), inferred that the “introduction of the gun into evidence is sufficient evidence from which the trier of fact could find that the gun was operable.”); State v. Johnson, 9th Dist.
green
State v. Patterson (2016)
(Appellant's Brief at 35.) {¶ 51} In Gaines, as examples of the type of circumstantial evidence that could be used to establish the operability of a firearm, the Supreme Court of Ohio listed "testimony as to gunshots, smell of gunpowder, bullets or bullet holes, etc." Id. at 69.
green
State v. Durdin (2014)
State v. Gaines, 46 Ohio St.3d 65, 69 (1989). {¶ 46} Ms. Daniels' testimony regarding the gun, in total, was the following: Q.
green
State v. Rogers (1990)
Id. at 69 [ 545 N.E.2d at 71 ].
green
Kent E. Appleman v. Melody L. Turner, Warden (1995)
State v. Vondenberg, 401 N.E.2d 437, 439-40 (Ohio 1980); see also State v. Gaines, 545 N.E.2d 68, 71 (Ohio 1989).
green
State v. Kovacic, Unpublished Decision (9-26-2003) (2003)
See State v. Gaines (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 65 , at syllabus. {¶ 12} The Supreme Court of Ohio has provided definition as to what kind of evidence is required to prove a firearm specification beyond a reasonable doubt. {¶ 13} In Gaines , the Supreme Court of Ohio established that "evidence adduced relative to the character of the weapon used is not sufficient to warrant a conviction under the firearm specification." Id. at 69 .
green
State v. Payton (1997)
See, generally, State v. Gaines (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 65 , 545 N.E.2d 68 .
green
State v. Manley (1994)
See, e.g., State v. Gaines (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 65 , 545 N.E.2d 68 ; State v. Gordon (1971), 28 Ohio St.2d 45 , 57 O.O.2d 180 , 276 N.E.2d 243 ; State v. Murphy (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 206 , 551 N.E.2d 932 .
green
State v. Mills (1991)
See State v. Gaines, supra, 46 Ohio St.3d at 68 , 545 N.E.2d at 71 .
green
State v. Murphy (1990)
See State v. Gaines, supra, at 69 , 545 N.E. 2d at 72 ; State v. Kulig (1974), 37 Ohio St. 2d 157 , 66 O.O. 2d 351, 309 N.E. 2d 897 .
green
State v. Easley, 07ap-578 (2-7-2008) (2008)
See State v. Gaines (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 65 , syllabus; State v. Murphy (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 206 , syllabus; Thompkins at 384-385.
green
State v. Manley (1994)
See, e.g., State v. Gaines (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 65 , 545 N.E. 3d 68 ; State v. Gordon (1971), 28 Ohio St.2d 45 , 57 O.O.2d 180 , 276 N.E.2d 243 ; State v. Murphy (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 206 , 551 N.E.2d 932 .