10 Ohio App. 3d 52 - State v. Hudson’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2008
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on State v. Pachay · State v. Lee · State v. Pudlock · State v. Wentworth · City of Aurora v. Patrick
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When sua sponte granting a continuance under R.C. 2945.72 (H), the trial court must enter the order of continuance and the reasons therefor by journal entry prior to the expiration of the time limit prescribed in R.C. 2945.71 for bringing a defendant to trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is not necessary that the appellant show prejudice by the continuance; he does, however, have the obligation to persuasively assert facts which show the continuance to be unreasonable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the accused's own motion, and the period of any reasonable continuance granted other than upon the accused's own motion * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.