5 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Campbellgreen1 sentence2018"If the court imposes sentence without affording the defendant an opportunity to allocute, then resentencing is required unless the error was invited or harmless." State v. Beasley, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2018-Ohio-493, ¶ 200 , citing State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 , 2014-Ohio- 2966, ¶ 179; see also State v. Campbell, 90 Ohio St.3d 320 (2000), paragraph three of the syllabus. {¶ 10} We review the trial court's decision on Long's motion with the understanding that this was a resentencing following appellate court modification of a jury's conviction with remand ordered for sentencing only. | 1 | 1 |
Long v. Warren General Hospitalgreen1 sentence2005Id. at 492 (Citation omitted). {¶ 10} We find the placement of appellant on the stretcher was "ancillary to and an inherently necessary part of" her diagnosis and treatment. | 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. Long
green
2 sentences2023However, the court then noted Long’s exception for “plain error” and held that “[i[t follows that if this limiting principle is applicable to a criminal action, it is also valid in a civil case.” Id., citing Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , at paragraph three of the syllabus. 2023However, the court then noted Long’s exception for “plain error” and held that “[i[t follows that if this limiting principle is applicable to a criminal action, it is also valid in a civil case.” Id., citing Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , at paragraph three of the syllabus. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Deck
green
1 sentence2021Warren CA2020-10-066, 2021-Ohio-3145, ¶ 26 . {¶ 42} We also reject Long's claim that Wells' representation was ineffective because she failed to retain an expert witness to rebut the testimony of the state's experts. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
City of Maumee v. Gabriel
green
2 sentences2020State v. Gustafson, 76 Ohio St.3d 425, 446 , 668 N.E.2d 435 (1996) (Douglas, J., concurring), citing Maumee v. Gabriel, 35 Ohio St.3d 60, 63 , 518 N.E.2d 558 (1988). 2020State v. Gustafson, 76 Ohio St.3d 425, 446 , 668 N.E.2d 435 (1996) (Douglas, J., concurring), citing Maumee v. Gabriel, 35 Ohio St.3d 60, 63 , 518 N.E.2d 558 (1988). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Gustafson
green
2 sentences2020State v. Gustafson, 76 Ohio St.3d 425, 446 , 668 N.E.2d 435 (1996) (Douglas, J., concurring), citing Maumee v. Gabriel, 35 Ohio St.3d 60, 63 , 518 N.E.2d 558 (1988). 2020State v. Gustafson, 76 Ohio St.3d 425, 446 , 668 N.E.2d 435 (1996) (Douglas, J., concurring), citing Maumee v. Gabriel, 35 Ohio St.3d 60, 63 , 518 N.E.2d 558 (1988). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Beasley
green
1 sentence2018"If the court imposes sentence without affording the defendant an opportunity to allocute, then resentencing is required unless the error was invited or harmless." State v. Beasley, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2018-Ohio-493, ¶ 200 , citing State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 , 2014-Ohio- 2966, ¶ 179; see also State v. Campbell, 90 Ohio St.3d 320 (2000), paragraph three of the syllabus. {¶ 10} We review the trial court's decision on Long's motion with the understanding that this was a resentencing following appellate court modification of a jury's conviction with remand ordered for sentencing only. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Osie (Slip Opinion)
green
1 sentence2018"If the court imposes sentence without affording the defendant an opportunity to allocute, then resentencing is required unless the error was invited or harmless." State v. Beasley, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2018-Ohio-493, ¶ 200 , citing State v. Osie, 140 Ohio St.3d 131 , 2014-Ohio- 2966, ¶ 179; see also State v. Campbell, 90 Ohio St.3d 320 (2000), paragraph three of the syllabus. {¶ 10} We review the trial court's decision on Long's motion with the understanding that this was a resentencing following appellate court modification of a jury's conviction with remand ordered for sentencing only. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
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.