petitioner submits claim (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

petitioner submits claim in Ohio

6 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 1998–2019 0 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. Blatnikgreen
ohioctapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
1 sentence

2002See, also, State v. Blatnik (1984), 17 Ohio App.3d 201 ("suffice it to say that an overwhelming authority of case law states that manifest injustice, as contemplated by the rule, does not, ipso facto result from counsel's erroneous advice concerning the sentence that will be imposed.") Rather, "[w]hen a petitioner submits a claim that his guilty plea was involuntary, a `record reflecting compliance with Crim.R. 11 has greater probative value' than a petitioner's self-serving affidavit.

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 (4)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Moore green
ohioctapp · 1994
2 sentences

2019(Citations omitted.) Id. at 285 , citing State v. Moore, 99 Ohio App.3d 748, 754 , 651 N.E.2d 1319 (1st Dist. 1994). {¶17} “When a petitioner submits his claim that his guilty plea was involuntary, a ‘record reflecting compliance with Crim.R. 11 has greater probative value’ than a petitioner’s self-serving affidavit.” State v. Brehm, 3d Dist.

2019(Citations omitted.) Id. at 285 , citing State v. Moore, 99 Ohio App.3d 748, 754 , 651 N.E.2d 1319 (1st Dist. 1994). {¶17} “When a petitioner submits his claim that his guilty plea was involuntary, a ‘record reflecting compliance with Crim.R. 11 has greater probative value’ than a petitioner’s self-serving affidavit.” State v. Brehm, 3d Dist.

51998–2019
State v. Saylor green
ohioctapp · 1998
2 sentences

2004State v. Brehm ([July 18,] 1997), * * * Seneca App. No. 13-97-05 * * *, following State v. Moore (1994), 99 Ohio {¶ 8} App.3d 748, 749, 753 * * *." State v. Saylor (1998), 125 Ohio App.3d 636 , 641 . 1 {¶ 9} In this case, to establish a need for an evidentiary hearing on his motion, Skaggs needed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate a manifest injustice.

2002State v. Brehm (1997), 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 3125 , Seneca App. No. 13-97-05, unreported, following State v. Moore (1994), 99 Ohio App.3d 748 , 749 , 753 , 651 N.E.2d 1319 ." State v. Saylor (1998), 125 Ohio App.3d 636 , 641 .

22002–2004
State v. Swortcheck green
ohioctapp · 1995
2 sentences

1998Appellant cites State v. Swortcheck (1995), 101 Ohio App.3d 770 , 656 N.E.2d 732 , in support of the proposition that the trial court must accept affidavits submitted in postconviction relief as true.

1998Appellant cites to State v. Swortcheck (1995), 101 Ohio App.3d 770 , in support of the proposition that the trial court must accept affidavits submitted in postconviction relief as true.

21998–1998
State v. Kapper green
ohio · 1983
2 sentences

2019Seneca No. 13-97-05, 1997 WL 401824 , *1 (July 18, 1997) (reviewing a petition for post- conviction relief wherein the defendant argued the ineffective assistance of his counsel rendered his guilty plea involuntary), quoting State v. Kapper, 5 Ohio St.3d 36, 38 , 448 N.E.2d 823 (1983) (holding that “[t]he dialogue between court and defendant envisioned by Crim.R. 11 is substantively meaningful.”). “[E]vidence [dehors] the record in the form of a petitioner’s own conclusory statements is not sufficient to compel an evidentiary hearing when the record fails to corroborate the petitioner’s allega

2019Seneca No. 13-97-05, 1997 WL 401824 , *1 (July 18, 1997) (reviewing a petition for post- conviction relief wherein the defendant argued the ineffective assistance of his counsel rendered his guilty plea involuntary), quoting State v. Kapper, 5 Ohio St.3d 36, 38 , 448 N.E.2d 823 (1983) (holding that “[t]he dialogue between court and defendant envisioned by Crim.R. 11 is substantively meaningful.”). “[E]vidence [dehors] the record in the form of a petitioner’s own conclusory statements is not sufficient to compel an evidentiary hearing when the record fails to corroborate the petitioner’s allega

12019–2019

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check