16 Ohio opinions name it 3 courts 1926–2025 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. Apanovitch (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2021See, e.g., State v. Apanovitch, 155 Ohio St.3d 358 , 2018-Ohio- 4744, 121 N.E.3d 351, ¶ 38-39 (trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s claim as being either a petition for postconviction relief or a motion for a new trial under Crim.R. 33, and without another basis to secure the trial court’s jurisdiction, the motion must be denied). 2021See, e.g., State v. Apanovitch, 155 Ohio St.3d 358 , 2018-Ohio- 4744, 121 N.E.3d 351, ¶ 38-39 (trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s claim as being either a petition for postconviction relief or a motion for a new trial under Crim.R. 33, and without another basis to secure the trial court’s jurisdiction, the motion must be denied). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Whitegreen1 sentence2003Id. at 437. {¶ 46} In this matter, although the court stated its erroneous belief that a pattern of discrimination was necessary, it nonetheless permitted the state to articulate a race neutral explanation for its exercise of the peremptory strike; specifically, the prospective juror's apparent hearing difficulty and her arthritis. {¶ 47} Appellant now argues that there is nothing in the record to support the state's assertion that the venireperson was hearing impaired and suggests that the prosecutor's contention that her arthritis might be distracting is, "* * * an insult to every person who | 1 | 1 |
State v. Grubbgreen2 sentences1998See, also, State v. Grubb (1986), 28 Ohio St.3d 199 , 28 OBR 285, 503 N.E.2d 142 . 1998See, also, State v. Grubb (1986), 28 Ohio St.3d 199 , 28 OBR 285, 503 N.E.2d 142 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Acevedo
green
2 sentences2002Further, the trial court accepted the jury’s verdict regarding the death sentence without making any attempt to cure the apparent error.8 See Acevedo, 141 F.3d 1421 (trial court placed under seal the verdict in which alternate jurors participated, gave curative instruction, and had jurors redeliberate without alternates). 2002Further, the trial court accepted the jury’s verdict regarding the death sentence without making any attempt to cure the apparent error. 8 See Acevedo, 141 F.3d 1421 (trial court placed under seal the verdict in which alternate jurors participated, gave curative instruction, and had jurors redeliberate without alternates). | 2 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Mays
green
1 sentence2025“When a trial court’s error results in a lesser punishment for the defendant and accordingly prejudices the State, the State bears the burden of objecting and calling the trial court’s attention to the error.” State v. Mays, 2024-Ohio-4616, ¶ 25 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Lynch v. Mayfield
green
2 sentences2005As discussed, infra, we hold it does not. {¶ 21} Section 35, Article II of the Ohio Constitution permits the establishment of a state fund, created by compulsory contribution by employers and administered by the state, for the purpose of providing “compensation to workmen and their dependents, for death, injuries or occupational disease, occasioned in the course of such workmen’s employment.” Id.; Lynch v. Mayfield (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 229, 233 , 590 N.E.2d 351 , citing Section 35, Article II, Ohio Constitution; Turner v. Admr., Miami App. No. 2002-CA-50, 2003-Ohio-2405 , 2003 WL 21060857 , 2005As discussed, infra, we hold it does not. {¶ 21} Section 35, Article II of the Ohio Constitution permits the establishment of a state fund, created by compulsory contribution by employers and administered by the state, for the purpose of providing “compensation to workmen and their dependents, for death, injuries or occupational disease, occasioned in the course of such workmen’s employment.” Id.; Lynch v. Mayfield (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 229, 233 , 590 N.E.2d 351 , citing Section 35, Article II, Ohio Constitution; Turner v. Admr., Miami App. No. 2002-CA-50, 2003-Ohio-2405 , 2003 WL 21060857 , | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Green v. China House
green
2 sentences2005“The determination of whether a hazard is latent or obvious depends upon the particular circumstances surrounding the hazard.” Green v. China House (1997), 123 Ohio App.3d 208, 212 , 703 N.E.2d 872 . 2005“The determination of whether a hazard is latent or obvious depends upon the particular circumstances surrounding the hazard.” Green v. China House (1997), 123 Ohio App.3d 208, 212 , 703 N.E.2d 872 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
United States v. Olano
green
2 sentences2003United States v. Olano (1993), 507 U.S. 725, 741 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (error in permitting alternate jurors to attend deliberations was not reversible error under the federal “plain error” standard). {¶ 50} Applying the test for plain error, the record does not show that, “but for the [trial court’s] error, the outcome of the trial dearly would have been otherwise.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Long (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 7 O.O.3d 178 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , paragraph two of the syllabus. 2003United States v. Olano (1993), 507 U.S. 725, 741 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (error in permitting alternate jurors to attend deliberations was not reversible error under the federal “plain error” standard). {¶ 50} Applying the test for plain error, the record does not show that, “but for the [trial court’s] error, the outcome of the trial dearly would have been otherwise.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Long (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 7 O.O.3d 178 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , paragraph two of the syllabus. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Long
green
2 sentences2003United States v. Olano (1993), 507 U.S. 725, 741 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (error in permitting alternate jurors to attend deliberations was not reversible error under the federal “plain error” standard). {¶ 50} Applying the test for plain error, the record does not show that, “but for the [trial court’s] error, the outcome of the trial dearly would have been otherwise.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Long (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 7 O.O.3d 178 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , paragraph two of the syllabus. 2003United States v. Olano (1993), 507 U.S. 725, 741 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (error in permitting alternate jurors to attend deliberations was not reversible error under the federal “plain error” standard). {¶ 50} Applying the test for plain error, the record does not show that, “but for the [trial court’s] error, the outcome of the trial dearly would have been otherwise.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Long (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 91 , 7 O.O.3d 178 , 372 N.E.2d 804 , paragraph two of the syllabus. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Nolan v. Nolan
green
1 sentence2003(Tr. 53-55.) {¶ 13} Under the "law of the case" doctrine, "the decision of a reviewing court in a case remains the law of that case on the legal questions involved for all subsequent proceedings in the case at both the trial and reviewing levels." Nolan v. Nolan (1984), 11 Ohio St.3d 1 , 3 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte
green
2 sentences1999Jackson, supra, 110 Ohio App.3d 142 , 673 N.E.2d at 688 , quoting Schneckloth, supra, at 233 , 93 S.Ct. at 2050 -2051 , 36 L.Ed.2d at 866 . 1999Jackson, supra, 110 Ohio App.3d 142 , 673 N.E.2d at 688 , quoting Schneckloth, supra, at 233 , 93 S.Ct. at 2050 -2051 , 36 L.Ed.2d at 866 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Jackson
green
1 sentence1999Jackson, supra, 110 Ohio App.3d 142 , 673 N.E.2d at 688 , quoting Schneckloth, supra, at 233 , 93 S.Ct. at 2050 -2051 , 36 L.Ed.2d at 866 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Holloway
green
2 sentences1989As this court held in paragraph two of the syllabus in State v. Holloway (1988), 38 Ohio St. 3d 239 , 527 N.E. 2d 831 , the independent weighing process at each appellate level provides a procedural safeguard against the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. 1989As this court held in paragraph two of the syllabus in State v. Holloway (1988), 38 Ohio St. 3d 239 , 527 N.E. 2d 831 , the independent weighing process at each appellate level provides a procedural safeguard against the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Kemp v. Feldman
green
2 sentences1989Kemp v. Feldman (1948), 84 Ohio App. 154 , 39 O.O. 173 , 81 N.E.2d 319 ; State Fid. 1989Kemp v. Feldman (1948), 84 Ohio App. 154 , 39 O.O. 173 , 81 N.E.2d 319 ; State Fid. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
United States v. Richard T. Ford
green
1 sentence1988Id. at 748 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Laws v. Davis
neutral
1 sentence1974In Laxes v. Davis (1929), 34 Ohio App. 157 , and Denly v. Wheeler (1924), 2 Ohio.Law Abs. 600 (parenthetically, it must be noted there is an apparent error in the statement of facts in the latter case as reported) both courts arrived at the conclusion that a grant in a will to the heirs of a person included a designated heir of that person under R. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Penn Mutual Life Ins. v. McGraw
neutral
1 sentence1926(See McGill v. Worland, 4 Abs. 630 .) 3. | 1 | 1926–1926 |
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.