State v. Midkiff
Citations
- 2022 Ohio 4004
Syllabus
The trial court did not err when it did not instruct the jury on the updated \stand your ground\ law, because the change in the law was substantive and thus could not be applied retroactively. Further, the trial court correctly instructed the jury on the law of self-defense. Finally, trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the jury instructions, as the self-defense instructions were accurate. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Epley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- State v. BradleyOhio Supreme Court· 1989-05-10· cited 7,124×
- State v. LongOhio Supreme Court· 1978-02-15· cited 3,848×
- State v. BirdOhio Supreme Court· 1998-05-06· cited 170×
- State v. BrooksOhio Supreme Court· 2022-07-21· cited 55×
- State v. JonesOhio Court of Appeals· 2020-06-18· cited 39×
- State v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-09-01· cited 28×
- State v. HurtOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-06-16· cited 17×
- State v. LovettOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-05-20· cited 16×
- State v. DixonOhio Court of Appeals· 2022-09-09· cited 10×
- State v. McClainOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-03-30· cited 6×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.