Notes of Decisions
Cited in
84
cases (
27 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case:
State v. Miller, 2023 Ohio 3448 (Ohio 2023).
State v. Miller, 2023 Ohio 3448 (Ohio 2023).
· cites it 15× “33, adopted as a rule of practice and procedure in support of R.C. 2945.79, permits a defendant to file a motion for a new trial when a defendant’s substantial rights have been materially affected by certain events.”
State v. Brown, 2017 Ohio 7134 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 14× “Third Assignment of Error – Motion for New Trial {¶ 33} In his third and final assignment of error, Brown argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial.”
State v. Guy, 2018 Ohio 4836 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 3× “Conclusion {¶ 67} For the foregoing reasons, we overrule James's nine assignments of error and affirm the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.”
State v. Miller, 664 N.E.2d 1309 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 4× “Appellant moved for a new trial pursuant to R.C. 2945.79, 3 which provides for the granting of a new trial on the application of the defendant for causes materially affecting his substantial rights.”
State v. Adams, 103 Ohio St. 3d 508 (Ohio 2004).
“This extensive voir dire lasted for 11 days, and the court and counsel readily agreed on those who should be excused.”
State v. Reed, 418 N.E.2d 1359 (Ohio 1981).
· cites it 2× “2d 23 , at page 36, this court stated: “***Under Section 2945.79(D), Revised Code, this court is authorized to modify a verdict if the evidence shows that the defendant is not guilty of the degree of crime for which he was convicted, but is guilty of a lesser included offense.”
State v. Roper, 2021 Ohio 188 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “33(A)[ and also R.C. 2945.79(B)], juror misconduct justifies a new trial only if it materially affected an accused’s substantial rights.”
State v. Taylor, 598 N.E.2d 818 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “33(A); R.C. 2945.79(A). Conversations by a third person with a juror during the progress of a trial for the purpose of influencing the verdict may invalidate the verdict, but where there is nothing in the record to demonstrate that the decision might have been influenced by such…”
State v. Gear, 2023 Ohio 1246 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 2× “rovides the following grounds for a new trial: (1) Irregularity in the proceedings, or in any order or ruling of the court, or abuse of discretion by the court, because of which the defendant was prevented from having a fair trial; (2) Misconduct of the jury, prosecuting…”
State v. Donkers, 867 N.E.2d 903 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007).
“See R.C. 2945.79(D) (where insufficient evidence *535 of degree of crime convicted but sufficient evidence of lesser degree, court of appeals can modify the offense).”
State v. Hudson, 2018 Ohio 423 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
“), quoting R.C. 2945.79(D). See also State v. Jackson , 4th Dist.”
State v. Clay, 280 N.E.2d 385 (Ohio Ct. App. 1972).
· cites it 4× “The testimony of the Athens County Prosecuting Attorney, offered during the trial of defendant-appellant, was rendered suspect by the affidavit of the disinterested witness, Don Rixman, and said conflict in sworn testimony raised the issue of misconduct, which was properly…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(A) — 6 cases
State v. Miller, 2023 Ohio 3448 (Ohio 2023).
“33, adopted as a rule of practice and procedure in support of R.C. 2945.79, permits a defendant to file a motion for a new trial when a defendant’s substantial rights have been materially affected by certain events.”
State v. Taylor, 598 N.E.2d 818 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
“33(A); R.C. 2945.79(A). Conversations by a third person with a juror during the progress of a trial for the purpose of influencing the verdict may invalidate the verdict, but where there is nothing in the record to demonstrate that the decision might have been influenced by such…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(A)(B) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(B) — 12 cases
State v. Adams, 103 Ohio St. 3d 508 (Ohio 2004).
“This extensive voir dire lasted for 11 days, and the court and counsel readily agreed on those who should be excused.”
State v. Brown, 2017 Ohio 7134 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Third Assignment of Error – Motion for New Trial {¶ 33} In his third and final assignment of error, Brown argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial.”
State v. Roper, 2021 Ohio 188 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
“33(A)[ and also R.C. 2945.79(B)], juror misconduct justifies a new trial only if it materially affected an accused’s substantial rights.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(C) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(D) — 27 cases
State v. Miller, 664 N.E.2d 1309 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995).
“Appellant moved for a new trial pursuant to R.C. 2945.79, 3 which provides for the granting of a new trial on the application of the defendant for causes materially affecting his substantial rights.”
State v. Reed, 418 N.E.2d 1359 (Ohio 1981).
“2d 23 , at page 36, this court stated: “***Under Section 2945.79(D), Revised Code, this court is authorized to modify a verdict if the evidence shows that the defendant is not guilty of the degree of crime for which he was convicted, but is guilty of a lesser included offense.”
State v. Donkers, 867 N.E.2d 903 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007).
“See R.C. 2945.79(D) (where insufficient evidence *535 of degree of crime convicted but sufficient evidence of lesser degree, court of appeals can modify the offense).”
State v. Hudson, 2018 Ohio 423 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
“), quoting R.C. 2945.79(D). See also State v. Jackson , 4th Dist.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2945.79(F) — 9 cases
State v. Miller, 2023 Ohio 3448 (Ohio 2023).
“33, adopted as a rule of practice and procedure in support of R.C. 2945.79, permits a defendant to file a motion for a new trial when a defendant’s substantial rights have been materially affected by certain events.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.