deficiency standard (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

deficiency standard in Ohio

6 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2003–2025 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Lewisgreen
ohioctapp · 1982 · cited in 2 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2003–2004
2 sentences

2004See State v. Wilson, citing State v. Lewis (1982), 4 Ohio App.3d 275 , 448 N.E.2d 487 . {¶ 33} We review a trial court's determination of a witness' competency under an abuse of discretion standard.

2004See State v. Wilson, citing State v. Lewis (1982), 4 Ohio App.3d 275 , 448 N.E.2d 487 . {¶ 33} We review a trial court's determination of a witness' competency under an abuse of discretion standard.

22
State v. Johnsongreen
ohioctapp · 2024 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025See State v. Johnson, 2024-Ohio-1163, ¶ 32 (8th Dist.).

11

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Bradley green
ohio · 1989
2 sentences

2015Appellant’s first assignment of error is not well-taken. {¶ 27} A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is evaluated under the deficiency standard set forth in State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus: 2.

2015Appellant’s first assignment of error is not well-taken. {¶ 27} A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is evaluated under the deficiency standard set forth in State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 , 538 N.E.2d 373 (1989), paragraphs two and three of the syllabus: 2.

32012–2015

Where else courts name it

TX 36 (1986–2022) FL 27 (1960–2019) CT 22 (1976–2022) IL 17 (1978–2026) CA 12 (1985–2026) PA 11 (1969–2025) NY 11 (1916–2006) GA 11 (1944–2025) ID 8 (2016–2024) NJ 8 (1934–2022) UT 8 (2020–2022) MI 7 (1988–2022) MO 7 (1932–2015) VT 6 (1915–2005) WA 6 (1971–2023) OH 6 (2003–2025) AZ 5 (1982–2024) LA 4 (1983–2015) AL 4 (1940–2002) IA 3 (1980–2026) WI 3 (1936–2025) TN 2 (1998–2001) IN 2 (1958–2018) MS 2 (1984–2002) NC 2 (2004–2023) MN 2 (1937–2010) OK 2 (1925–2020) NV 2 (1973–2018) KS 2 (1982–1996) OR 2 (1998–2016) DE 2 (2018–2024)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check