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.
12 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 6 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. Squaregreen1 sentence2026See Square, 2018-Ohio-4574, at ¶ 39 (11th Dist.). {¶12} To successfully assert that a trial court committed plain error, a defendant must show an error that constitutes an obvious defect in the trial proceedings and demonstrate there is a reasonable probability that the error resulted in prejudice, meaning that the error affected the outcome of the trial. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Littlegreen1 sentence2024“To establish plain error, a defendant must show an error that constitutes an obvious defect in the trial proceedings and demonstrate that the error affected the 4 Case No. 2024-A-0001 outcome of the trial.” State v. Little, 2023-Ohio-4098, ¶ 77 (11th Dist.), citing State v. Rogers, 2015-Ohio-2459 , ¶ 22. | 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. Rogers
green
2 sentences2024“To successfully assert that a trial court committed plain error, a defendant must show an error that constitutes an obvious defect in the trial proceedings and demonstrate that the error affected the outcome of the trial.” State v. Gordon, 152 Ohio St.3d 528 , 2018-Ohio-259, ¶ 23 , citing State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 , 2015-Ohio-2459 , ¶ 22. {¶ 15} During voir dire, the prosecutor made the following comments to the jury panel: The defendant is charged with violation of a protection order today, making a threat through a third party. 2024State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 , 2015-Ohio-2459 , 38 N.E.3d 860, ¶ 22 .” State v. Little, 11th Dist. | 4 | 2018–2024 |
State v. Gordon
green
2 sentences2024“To successfully assert that a trial court committed plain error, a defendant must show an error that constitutes an obvious defect in the trial proceedings and demonstrate that the error affected the outcome of the trial.” State v. Gordon, 152 Ohio St.3d 528 , 2018-Ohio-259, ¶ 23 , citing State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 , 2015-Ohio-2459 , ¶ 22. {¶ 15} During voir dire, the prosecutor made the following comments to the jury panel: The defendant is charged with violation of a protection order today, making a threat through a third party. 2024“To successfully assert that a trial court committed plain error, a defendant must show an error that constitutes an obvious defect in the trial proceedings and demonstrate that the error affected the outcome of the trial.” State v. Gordon, 152 Ohio St.3d 528 , 2018-Ohio-259, ¶ 23 , citing State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 , 2015-Ohio-2459 , ¶ 22. {¶ 15} During voir dire, the prosecutor made the following comments to the jury panel: The defendant is charged with violation of a protection order today, making a threat through a third party. | 2 | 2024–2025 |
State v. Patterson
green
1 sentence2019Trumbull No. 2013-T-0062, 2015-Ohio-4423, ¶ 60 , citing State v. Schaim, 65 Ohio St.3d 51, 59 , 600 N.E.2d 661 (1992). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Schaim
green
2 sentences2019Trumbull No. 2013-T-0062, 2015-Ohio-4423, ¶ 60 , citing State v. Schaim, 65 Ohio St.3d 51, 59 , 600 N.E.2d 661 (1992). 2019Trumbull No. 2013-T-0062, 2015-Ohio-4423, ¶ 60 , citing State v. Schaim, 65 Ohio St.3d 51, 59 , 600 N.E.2d 661 (1992). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Bradley
green
2 sentences2017State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 142 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989). 2017State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136, 142 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Barnes
green
2 sentences2017Rogers at ¶ 22; State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 27 , 759 N.E.2d 1240 (2002). 2017Rogers at ¶ 22; State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21, 27 , 759 N.E.2d 1240 (2002). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Landrum
green
1 sentence2008State v. Landrum (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 107 . {¶ 118} Cobb argues that the prosecutor misinformed the jury as to the burden of proof necessary to find that Cobb was guilty of possessing a firearm while committing the drug-possession offense. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
United States v. Cronic
green
2 sentences1994United States v. Cronic (1984), 466 U.S. 648 , 104 S.Ct. 2039 , 80 L.Ed.2d 657 . 1994United States v. Cronic (1984), 466 U.S. 648 , 104 S.Ct. 2039 , 80 L.Ed.2d 657 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.