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 1992–2026 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. Sowellgreen2 sentences2026Bradley argues that the trial court’s omission of a transferred-self-defense instruction was a plain error because that doctrine has been recognized and applied in Ohio for over 50 years. {¶ 20} To be sure, “the doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.” State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 332 (1988). 2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona | 6 | 12 |
State v. Solomongreen2 sentences2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona 2018See R.C. 2929.04(A)(5) (“the offense at bar was part of a course of conduct involving the purposeful killing of or attempt to kill two or more persons by the offender”). {¶ 113} “The doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.” State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St. 3d 322 , 332, 530 N.E.2d 1294 (1988). “ ‘If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).’ ” Powell, 132 Ohio St. 3d 233 , 2012- | 3 | 9 |
State v. Powellgreen2 sentences2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona 2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona | 2 | 5 |
State v. Dean (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona 2023State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 136 (stating "[t]he doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law," and noting transferred intent applies in aggravated murder cases); State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 ; State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 331 (1988) (rejecting the defendant's argument that his indictment was defective for alleging prior calculation and design where the defendant admitted to having a prior calculation and design to kill one person but "[i]n his attempt to carry out his design, [the defendant] purposely and intentiona | 2 | 3 |
Bradshaw v. Richeygreen2 sentences2019See also Bradshaw v. Richey, 546 U.S. 74, 76 , 126 S.Ct. 602 (2005). “‘“If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).”’” Dean at ¶ 136 , quoting State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 , quoting State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 (1981), paragraph one of the syllabus. 2019See also Bradshaw v. Richey, 546 U.S. 74, 76 , 126 S.Ct. 602 (2005). “‘“If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).”’” Dean at ¶ 136 , quoting State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577, ¶ 171 , quoting State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 (1981), paragraph one of the syllabus. | 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. Wilson
green
1 sentence2019Furthermore, this evidence is sufficient evidence that Sheldon acted with prior calculation and design as to G.N.S. -17- Accord State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 , 2015-Ohio-4347, ¶ 147 ; State v. Wilson, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 104333, 2017-Ohio-2980, ¶ 65 . “‘The doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.’” Dean at ¶ 136, quoting State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 332 (1988). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Bland
green
2 sentences2015Summit No. 26360, 2012-Ohio-4250 , 2012 WL 4100411 , ¶ 6. {¶ 136} “The doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.” State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 332 , 530 N.E.2d 1294 (1988). “ ‘If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).’ ” State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577 , 971 N.E.2d 865 , ¶ 171, quoting State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 , 421 N.E.2d 139 (1981), 2015Summit No. 26360, 2012-Ohio-4250 , 2012 WL 4100411 , ¶ 6. {¶ 136} “The doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.” State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 332 , 530 N.E.2d 1294 (1988). “ ‘If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).’ ” State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577 , 971 N.E.2d 865 , ¶ 171, quoting State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 , 421 N.E.2d 139 (1981), | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Cook
neutral
1 sentence2015Summit No. 26360, 2012-Ohio-4250 , 2012 WL 4100411 , ¶ 6. {¶ 136} “The doctrine of transferred intent is firmly rooted in Ohio law.” State v. Sowell, 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 332 , 530 N.E.2d 1294 (1988). “ ‘If one purposely causes the death of another and the death is the result of a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill someone other than the victim, the offender is guilty of aggravated murder in violation of R.C. 2903.01(A).’ ” State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 , 2012-Ohio-2577 , 971 N.E.2d 865 , ¶ 171, quoting State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 , 421 N.E.2d 139 (1981), | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.