Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hinton v. Alabamagreen1 sentence2025Hinton v. Alabama, 571 U.S. 263, 273 (2014). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Colegreen2 sentences2022Instead, the petition must be sufficient on its face to raise an issue whether Bunch was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, and Bunch’s claim depends on factual allegations that cannot be determined by examining the record from his trial, see Milanovich, 42 Ohio St.2d 46 , 325 N.E.2d 540 , at paragraph one of the syllabus; see also State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112, 114 , 443 N.E.2d 169 (1982) (to merit a hearing on a postconviction ineffective-assistance claim, a petitioner must proffer evidence outside the record that if true, would show that counsel was ineffective). 2022Instead, the petition must be sufficient on its face to raise an issue whether Bunch was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, and Bunch’s claim depends on factual allegations that cannot be determined by examining the record from his trial, see Milanovich, 42 Ohio St.2d 46 , 325 N.E.2d 540 , at paragraph one of the syllabus; see also State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112, 114 , 443 N.E.2d 169 (1982) (to merit a hearing on a postconviction ineffective-assistance claim, a petitioner must proffer evidence outside the record that if true, would show that counsel was ineffective). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Ronald Berkowitz, Paul D'alessandro, Kevin Van Coughnett, Bisan Vafaie, and Wendall Howellgreen2 sentences2005See id. {¶ 52} Yet, our analysis does not stop here, as explained above, presentation of mutually antagonistic defenses are not prejudicial per se. 2005Id. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Thompson
green
1 sentence2023Butler No. CA2022-09-080, 2023-Ohio-559 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Milanovich
green
2 sentences2022Instead, the petition must be sufficient on its face to raise an issue whether Bunch was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, and Bunch’s claim depends on factual allegations that cannot be determined by examining the record from his trial, see Milanovich, 42 Ohio St.2d 46 , 325 N.E.2d 540 , at paragraph one of the syllabus; see also State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112, 114 , 443 N.E.2d 169 (1982) (to merit a hearing on a postconviction ineffective-assistance claim, a petitioner must proffer evidence outside the record that if true, would show that counsel was ineffective). 2022Instead, the petition must be sufficient on its face to raise an issue whether Bunch was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, and Bunch’s claim depends on factual allegations that cannot be determined by examining the record from his trial, see Milanovich, 42 Ohio St.2d 46 , 325 N.E.2d 540 , at paragraph one of the syllabus; see also State v. Cole, 2 Ohio St.3d 112, 114 , 443 N.E.2d 169 (1982) (to merit a hearing on a postconviction ineffective-assistance claim, a petitioner must proffer evidence outside the record that if true, would show that counsel was ineffective). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Nicholas
green
2 sentences2022The Courts Below Employed Incorrect Standards {¶ 28} The trial court’s entry dismissing Bunch’s postconviction petition made no mention of Bunch’s allegation that his trial counsel’s failure to use an expert witness was unreasonable in the specific context of his case.2 Instead, it concluded that counsel’s actions were not subject to a finding of ineffective assistance according to this court’s reasoning in State v. Nicholas, 66 Ohio St.3d 431 , 613 N.E.2d 225 (1993) and State v. Hartman, 93 Ohio St.3d 274 , 754 N.E.2d 1150 (2001). 2022The Courts Below Employed Incorrect Standards {¶ 28} The trial court’s entry dismissing Bunch’s postconviction petition made no mention of Bunch’s allegation that his trial counsel’s failure to use an expert witness was unreasonable in the specific context of his case.2 Instead, it concluded that counsel’s actions were not subject to a finding of ineffective assistance according to this court’s reasoning in State v. Nicholas, 66 Ohio St.3d 431 , 613 N.E.2d 225 (1993) and State v. Hartman, 93 Ohio St.3d 274 , 754 N.E.2d 1150 (2001). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Hartman
green
2 sentences2022The Courts Below Employed Incorrect Standards {¶ 28} The trial court’s entry dismissing Bunch’s postconviction petition made no mention of Bunch’s allegation that his trial counsel’s failure to use an expert witness was unreasonable in the specific context of his case.2 Instead, it concluded that counsel’s actions were not subject to a finding of ineffective assistance according to this court’s reasoning in State v. Nicholas, 66 Ohio St.3d 431 , 613 N.E.2d 225 (1993) and State v. Hartman, 93 Ohio St.3d 274 , 754 N.E.2d 1150 (2001). 2022The Courts Below Employed Incorrect Standards {¶ 28} The trial court’s entry dismissing Bunch’s postconviction petition made no mention of Bunch’s allegation that his trial counsel’s failure to use an expert witness was unreasonable in the specific context of his case.2 Instead, it concluded that counsel’s actions were not subject to a finding of ineffective assistance according to this court’s reasoning in State v. Nicholas, 66 Ohio St.3d 431 , 613 N.E.2d 225 (1993) and State v. Hartman, 93 Ohio St.3d 274 , 754 N.E.2d 1150 (2001). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Scott
green
1 sentence2022Our focus in this decision is not on the merits of Bunch’s claim; instead, it is on the adequacy of the process leading up to a decision on Bunch’s claim. “[A]ssurance that the public is protected because the actual offender is behind bars depends on the confidence of the conviction,” State v. Scott, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2022-Ohio-4277 , ___ N.E.3d ___, ¶ 22, and thus the state should be just as interested as petitioners are in having hearings on legitimate challenges. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Martin
green
2 sentences1989State v. Martin (1983), 20 Ohio App.3d 172 , 20 OBR 215, 485 N.E.2d 717 , paragraph two of the syllabus. 1989State v. Martin (1983), 20 Ohio App.3d 172 , 20 OBR 215, 485 N.E.2d 717 , paragraph two of the syllabus. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.