photo satisfies standard (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

photo satisfies standard in Ohio

7 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2021 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Vrabelgreen
ohio · 2003 · cited in 5 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2014–2021
2 sentences

2021Ford at ¶ 237; see State v. Vrabel, 99 Ohio St.3d 184 , 2003-Ohio-3193 , ¶ 69.

2020State v. Vrabel, 99 Ohio St.3d 184 , 2003- Ohio-3193, 790 N.E.2d 303 , ¶ 69; Mammone, 139 Ohio St.3d 467 , 2014-Ohio- 1942, 13 N.E.3d 1051, at ¶ 96 . 26 January Term, 2020 a.

45

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Mammone (Slip Opinion) green
ohio · 2014
2 sentences

2016“A trial court’s decision that a photo satisfies this standard is reviewable only 28 for abuse of discretion.” State v. Mammone, 139 Ohio St.3d 467 , 2014-Ohio-1942, ¶ 96 .

2016“A trial court’s decision that a photo satisfies this standard is reviewable only 28 for abuse of discretion.” State v. Mammone, 139 Ohio St.3d 467 , 2014-Ohio-1942, ¶ 96 .

32016–2020
State v. Lang green
ohio · 2011
2 sentences

2016“The term gruesome in the context of photographic evidence should, in most cases, be limited to depictions of actual bodies or body parts.” (Internal quotations and citation omitted.) State v. Lang, 129 Ohio St.3d 512 , 2011-Ohio-4215, ¶ 141 . {¶68} At trial, Mr. Brantley only objected to the admission of three photographs that were part of State’s exhibit 89, which was a group of PowerPoint slides of the crime scene.

2016“The term gruesome in the context of photographic evidence should, in most cases, be limited to depictions of actual bodies or body parts.” (Internal quotations and citation omitted.) State v. Lang, 129 Ohio St.3d 512 , 2011-Ohio-4215, ¶ 141 . {¶68} At trial, Mr. Brantley only objected to the admission of three photographs that were part of State’s exhibit 89, which was a group of PowerPoint slides of the crime scene.

12016–2016

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.04 (5) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.01 (4) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2911.01 (3) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2911.11 (3) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.03 (3) OH § Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.05 (3)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check