Case Citator › State v. Long

State v. Long

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Citation
53 Ohio St. 2d 91
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
228 of 228
Citing cases (total)
3,848
Treatment dates
2015
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. State v. Long's strict plain-error prejudice formulation was abrogated in part by later Supreme Court of Ohio authority. State v. Rogers required a reasonable probability of prejudice, and State v. Taylor-Hollingsworth expressly recognized that this replaced a literal reading of Long's “clearly would have been otherwise” language.
More on how this was screened

Long's caution that plain error should be noticed only in exceptional circumstances remains in use. All 228 flagged citations have been read; the confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

3,848 later cases cite State v. Long; 228 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on State v. Long?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court of Ohio adopted a reasonable-probability test for plain-error prejudice in place of Long's strict outcome formulation, as Taylor-Hollingsworth later explained.

    State v. Rogers · Supreme Court of Ohio · filed

    The accused is therefore required to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the error resulted in prejudice — the same deferential standard for reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads State v. Long and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace