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.
13 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 1989–2022 1 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. Calhoungreen2 sentences2016State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279, 282 (1999); State v. Jackson, 64 Ohio St.2d 107 (1980). 2005Calhoun , at 282; State v. Jackson (1980), 64 Ohio St.2d 107 , 110 . | 3 | 4 |
Cater v. City of Clevelandgreen1 sentence2005See Cater, 83 Ohio St.3d at 28 . {¶ 14} For general immunity to apply under the first tier of the analysis, a court must find that the defendant seeking immunity is a political subdivision that was engaged in a governmental or proprietary function. | 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. Jackson
green
2 sentences2016State v. Calhoun, 86 Ohio St.3d 279, 282 (1999); State v. Jackson, 64 Ohio St.2d 107 (1980). 2014Calhoun at 282 ; State v. Jackson, 64 Ohio St.2d 107 (1980). {¶ 17} To warrant an evidentiary hearing on a petition for post-conviction relief, a petitioner bears the initial burden of providing evidence that demonstrates a cognizable claim of constitutional error. | 7 | 2003–2016 |
State v. Threatt
green
2 sentences2022A defendant seeking a waiver of the payment of court costs must -59- move for such a waiver at sentencing.6 State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 , 2006-Ohio-905 , 843 N.E.2d 164 ; State v. Stutz, 2d Dist. 2022A defendant seeking a waiver of the payment of court costs must -59- move for such a waiver at sentencing.6 State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St.3d 277 , 2006-Ohio-905 , 843 N.E.2d 164 ; State v. Stutz, 2d Dist. | 3 | 2012–2022 |
State v. Stutz
neutral
1 sentence2022Montgomery No. 24489, 2011-Ohio-5210, ¶ 16 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Cole
green
1 sentence2006State v. Cole (1982), 2 Ohio St.3d 112 , 113 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Rakas v. Illinois
green
2 sentences1989The second aspect of Jones was repudiated in Rakas and replaced with the test of whether the defendant seeking to challenge the legality of the search and seizure “had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the premises.” 439 U.S. at 143 , 99 S.Ct. at 430 , 58 L.Ed.2d at 401 . 1989The second aspect of Jones was repudiated in Rakas and replaced with the test of whether the defendant seeking to challenge the legality of the search and seizure “had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the premises.” 439 U.S. at 143 , 99 S.Ct. at 430 , 58 L.Ed.2d at 401 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
United States v. Salvucci
green
2 sentences1989The “automatic standing” aspect of Jones was expressly overruled in United States v. Salvucci, supra. Instead, the court stated: “ * * * we must instead engage in a ‘conscientious effort to apply the Fourth Amendment’ by asking not merely whether the defendant had a possessory interest in the items seized, but whether he had an expectation of privacy in the area searched.” 448 U.S. at 93 , 100 S.Ct. at 2553 , 65 L.Ed.2d at 629 . *348 Moreover, “[w]hile property ownership is clearly a factor to be considered in determining whether an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights have been violated * * * 1989The “automatic standing” aspect of Jones was expressly overruled in United States v. Salvucci, supra. Instead, the court stated: “ * * * we must instead engage in a ‘conscientious effort to apply the Fourth Amendment’ by asking not merely whether the defendant had a possessory interest in the items seized, but whether he had an expectation of privacy in the area searched.” 448 U.S. at 93 , 100 S.Ct. at 2553 , 65 L.Ed.2d at 629 . *348 Moreover, “[w]hile property ownership is clearly a factor to be considered in determining whether an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights have been violated * * * | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.