35 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2025 9 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. Griffiegreen2 sentences2024"In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser- included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel." State v. Riley, 2007-Ohio-4409, ¶ 5 (10th Dist.), citing State v. Griffie, 74 Ohio St.3d 332, 333 , 1996-Ohio-71 . 2012State v. Teets, Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶26; State v. Clark, Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843, at ¶15 , citing State v. Griffie * * *, 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 658 N.E.2d 764 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley, Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, at ¶5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis, Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246, at ¶18 (“Defendant in this case has offered no evi | 3 | 13 |
State v. Riley, 06ap-1091 (8-28-2007)green2 sentences2024"In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser- included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel." State v. Riley, 2007-Ohio-4409, ¶ 5 (10th Dist.), citing State v. Griffie, 74 Ohio St.3d 332, 333 , 1996-Ohio-71 . 2022Franklin No. 06AP- 1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, ¶ 5-7 , citing State v. Clayton, 62 Ohio St.2d 45, 47-48 (1980). {¶ 31} In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel. | 3 | 6 |
State v. Claytongreen2 sentences2022Franklin No. 06AP- 1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, ¶ 5-7 , citing State v. Clayton, 62 Ohio St.2d 45, 47-48 (1980). {¶ 31} In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel. 2000State v. Griffie (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 333 , citing State v. Clayton, supra . | 1 | 3 |
State v. Davis, Unpublished Decision (6-23-2004)green2 sentences2012State v. Teets, Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶26; State v. Clark, Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843, at ¶15 , citing State v. Griffie * * *, 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 658 N.E.2d 764 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley, Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, at ¶5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis, Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246, at ¶18 (“Defendant in this case has offered no evi 2008State v. Teets , Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶ 26; State v. Clark , Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843 , at ¶ 15 , citing State v. Griffie (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley , Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409 , at ¶ 5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis , Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246 , at ¶ 18 ("Defendant in this case has offered no evidence | 1 | 3 |
State v. Hubbardgreen1 sentence2025Thus, to establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on a failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense, an “[a]ppellant must [generally] demonstrate that the failure to make the request resulted from a reason other than reasonable trial strategy.” State v. Hubbard, 2014-Ohio-122, ¶ 14 (10th Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2024State v. Lewis, 2020-Ohio-5265 , ¶ 51 (8th Dist.), citing State v. Jackson, 2016-Ohio-3278, ¶ 20 (6th Dist.). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Moodygreen1 sentence2023Butler No. CA2021-05- 052, 2022-Ohio-2529, ¶ 31 , citing State v. Griffie, 74 Ohio St.3d 332, 333 (1996) ("[f]ailure to request instructions on lesser-included offenses is a matter of trial strategy and does not establish ineffective assistance of counsel"). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Davis (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2022Licking No. 17-CA-55, 2017-Ohio-9445 , ¶ 30-31, rev’d, 159 Ohio St.3d 31 , 2020-Ohio-309, ¶ 17 (rejecting the rationale in Springer and instead relying on the plain language of R.C. 2947.23(C) to hold that “the failure to request a waiver of costs at sentencing is not ineffective assistance of counsel[,]” as an “[a]ppellant is not prejudiced * * * because he is not foreclosed from filing a request at a later time”). 2022Licking No. 17-CA-55, 2017-Ohio-9445 , ¶ 30-31, rev’d, 159 Ohio St.3d 31 , 2020-Ohio-309, ¶ 17 (rejecting the rationale in Springer and instead relying on the plain language of R.C. 2947.23(C) to hold that “the failure to request a waiver of costs at sentencing is not ineffective assistance of counsel[,]” as an “[a]ppellant is not prejudiced * * * because he is not foreclosed from filing a request at a later time”). | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2014Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-688, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus. {¶57} “In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel.” State v. Riley, 10th Dist. 2014Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-688, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus. {¶57} “In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel.” State v. Riley, 10th Dist. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cottrellgreen1 sentence2012See, State v. Cottrell, Fourth Dist. 11CA3241, 11CA3242, 2012-Ohio-4583 , I find the Delaware County, Case No. 12CAA020012 31 corollary failure to object to the instruction, likewise, might be trial strategy as it allows a jury to find a defendant not guilty of the greater indicted offense thereby allowing for the possibility of a lesser punishment on the inferior offense. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Daviegreen1 sentence2002See State v. Davie (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 311 , 331 . | 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. Threatt
green
2 sentences2023State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 , 2006-Ohio-905 , 843 N.E.2d 164, ¶ 23 . 2023State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 , 2006-Ohio-905 , 843 N.E.2d 164, ¶ 23 . | 5 | 2020–2023 |
State v. Griffie
green
2 sentences2024"In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser- included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel." State v. Riley, 2007-Ohio-4409, ¶ 5 (10th Dist.), citing State v. Griffie, 74 Ohio St.3d 332, 333 , 1996-Ohio-71 . 2012State v. Teets, Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶26; State v. Clark, Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843, at ¶15 , citing State v. Griffie * * *, 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 658 N.E.2d 764 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley, Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, at ¶5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis, Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246, at ¶18 (“Defendant in this case has offered no evi | 3 | 2008–2024 |
State v. Bradley
green
2 sentences2014Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-688, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus. {¶57} “In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel.” State v. Riley, 10th Dist. 2014Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-688, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus. {¶57} “In Ohio, there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy and does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel.” State v. Riley, 10th Dist. | 2 | 2014–2015 |
State v. Clark, Unpublished Decision (7-16-2004)
green
2 sentences2012State v. Teets, Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶26; State v. Clark, Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843, at ¶15 , citing State v. Griffie * * *, 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 658 N.E.2d 764 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley, Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409, at ¶5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis, Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246, at ¶18 (“Defendant in this case has offered no evi 2008State v. Teets , Pickaway App. No. 02CA1, 2002-Ohio-6799 , at ¶ 26; State v. Clark , Lawrence App. No. 03CA18, 2004-Ohio-3843 , at ¶ 15 , citing State v. Griffie (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 332 , 1996-Ohio-71 ; see, also, State v. Riley , Franklin App. No. 06AP-P1091, 2007-Ohio-4409 , at ¶ 5 (holding that, in light of this presumption, the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense does not by itself establish plain error or the ineffective assistance of counsel); and State v. Davis , Summit App. No. 21794, 2004-Ohio-3246 , at ¶ 18 ("Defendant in this case has offered no evidence | 2 | 2008–2012 |
State v. Williford
green
2 sentences1999State v. Keenan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 133 , 151 , citing State v. Williford (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 247 , 251 . 1999State v. Keenan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 133 , 151 , citing State v. Williford (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 247 , 251 . | 2 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Keenan
green
2 sentences1999State v. Keenan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 133 , 151 , citing State v. Williford (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 247 , 251 . 1999State v. Keenan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 133 , 151 , citing State v. Williford (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 247 , 251 . | 2 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Gipson
green
1 sentence2021The Supreme Court of Ohio has found that under R.C. 2929.18(B)(1) “the affidavit must be formally filed with the court prior to the filing of a journal entry reflecting the trial court’s sentencing decision.” Gipson, 80 Ohio St.3d at 632 , 1998-Ohio-659 , 687 N.E.2d 750 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Gipson
green
2 sentences2021The Supreme Court of Ohio has found that under R.C. 2929.18(B)(1) “the affidavit must be formally filed with the court prior to the filing of a journal entry reflecting the trial court’s sentencing decision.” Gipson, 80 Ohio St.3d at 632 , 1998-Ohio-659 , 687 N.E.2d 750 . 2021The Supreme Court of Ohio has found that under R.C. 2929.18(B)(1) “the affidavit must be formally filed with the court prior to the filing of a journal entry reflecting the trial court’s sentencing decision.” Gipson, 80 Ohio St.3d at 632 , 1998-Ohio-659 , 687 N.E.2d 750 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Thomas
green
2 sentences2019A lesser-included offense charge “is required only where the evidence presented at trial would reasonably support both an acquittal on the crime charged and a conviction upon the lesser included offense.” State v. Thomas, 40 Ohio St.3d 213 , 533 N.E.2d 286 (1988), paragraph two of the syllabus. {¶25} Pursuant to Ohio law, “there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy * * *,” as it represents a tactical decision to seek acquittal. 2019A lesser-included offense charge “is required only where the evidence presented at trial would reasonably support both an acquittal on the crime charged and a conviction upon the lesser included offense.” State v. Thomas, 40 Ohio St.3d 213 , 533 N.E.2d 286 (1988), paragraph two of the syllabus. {¶25} Pursuant to Ohio law, “there is a presumption that the failure to request an instruction on a lesser-included offense constitutes a matter of trial strategy * * *,” as it represents a tactical decision to seek acquittal. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Phillips
green
2 sentences2019Southam at ¶ 68, quoting State v. Phillips, 74 Ohio St.3d 72, 85 , 656 N.E.2d 643 (1995). {¶ 15} Even assuming appellant could demonstrate deficient performance by trial counsel, based on a failure to request waiver at sentencing, he demonstrates no resulting prejudice. 2019Southam at ¶ 68, quoting State v. Phillips, 74 Ohio St.3d 72, 85 , 656 N.E.2d 643 (1995). {¶ 15} Even assuming appellant could demonstrate deficient performance by trial counsel, based on a failure to request waiver at sentencing, he demonstrates no resulting prejudice. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Weddington
neutral
1 sentence2018Scioto No. 15CA3695, 2015-Ohio-5249 , ¶ 23 and State v. Walker, 4th Dist. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Walker
green
1 sentence2018“As a result, ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims based upon a failure to request a waiver of costs at the time of sentencing have become difficult - if not impossible- to establish.” Id., citing Farnese at ¶ 15; accord State v. Weddington, 4th Dist. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Levonyak, 05 Ma 227 (9-21-2007)
green
1 sentence2017No. 05 MA 227, 2007-Ohio-5044, ¶ 19 , citing State v. Walker, 4th Dist. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Hlinovsky
green
1 sentence2013State v. Griffie, 74 Ohio St.3d 332, 333 , 658 N.E.2d 764 ; State v. Hlinovsky, 7th Dist. no. 09BE19, 2011-Ohio-6421, ¶ 128 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Deem
green
1 sentence2012The Supreme Court of Ohio held in State v. Deem, 40 Ohio St.3d 205 (1988), paragraph three of the syllabus, that: [a]n offense may be a lesser included offense of another if (i) the offense carries a lesser penalty than the other; (ii) the greater offense cannot, as statutorily defined, ever be committed without the lesser offense, as statutorily defined, also being committed; and (iii) some element of the greater offense is not required to prove the commission of the lesser offense. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. Pigg, 24360 (5-6-2009)
neutral
1 sentence2012No. 24360, 2009-Ohio-2107, ¶ 5 . {¶23} Nonetheless, even assuming that the failure to request the instruction was not trial strategy in this instance, we cannot say the trial court committed plain error. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. Davis, Unpublished Decision (8-10-2005)
green
1 sentence2011Id. {¶20} Here, it appears defense counsel was given wide latitude during cross- examination of the accomplice, Frano. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Noggle
green
2 sentences2008State v. Claytor (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 234 , 240 , 574 N.E.2d 472 ("What appears to have been a tactical decision [not to request the lesser included offense in jury instructions] in this case during the trial cannot now be converted into judicial error."); State v. Noggle , 140 Ohio App.3d 733 , 746 , 2000-Ohio-1927 , 749 N.E.2d 309 ("[W]e note that plain error cannot be used to negate a deliberate, tactical decision by trial counsel."). 2008State v. Claytor (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 234 , 240 , 574 N.E.2d 472 ("What appears to have been a tactical decision [not to request the lesser included offense in jury instructions] in this case during the trial cannot now be converted into judicial error."); State v. Noggle , 140 Ohio App.3d 733 , 746 , 2000-Ohio-1927 , 749 N.E.2d 309 ("[W]e note that plain error cannot be used to negate a deliberate, tactical decision by trial counsel."). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Claytor
green
2 sentences2008State v. Claytor (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 234 , 240 , 574 N.E.2d 472 ("What appears to have been a tactical decision [not to request the lesser included offense in jury instructions] in this case during the trial cannot now be converted into judicial error."); State v. Noggle , 140 Ohio App.3d 733 , 746 , 2000-Ohio-1927 , 749 N.E.2d 309 ("[W]e note that plain error cannot be used to negate a deliberate, tactical decision by trial counsel."). 2008State v. Claytor (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 234 , 240 , 574 N.E.2d 472 ("What appears to have been a tactical decision [not to request the lesser included offense in jury instructions] in this case during the trial cannot now be converted into judicial error."); State v. Noggle , 140 Ohio App.3d 733 , 746 , 2000-Ohio-1927 , 749 N.E.2d 309 ("[W]e note that plain error cannot be used to negate a deliberate, tactical decision by trial counsel."). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| State v. Brooks green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.