104 Ohio App. 289 - State v. Neff’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 state decisions

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[B]eing `under the influence of alcohol or intoxicating liquor' means that the accused must have consumed some intoxicating beverage, whether mild or potent, and *Page 16 in such quantity, whether small or great, that the effect thereof on him was to adversely affect his actions, reactions, conduct, movements or mental processes, or to impair his reactions, under the circumstances then existing so as to deprive him of that clearness of the intellect and control of himself which he would otherwise possess”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Wise, 2008-Ca-9 (12-31-2008) · State v. Croston, 2008-Ca-00084 (10-27-2008)

2. “Proof of factual circumstance concerning the defendant's conduct and activities preceding and following the driving of the vehicle [one] is charged to have driven while under the influence of intoxicating liquor is relevant to the ultimate issue of whether [a] defendant was driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Wise, 2008-Ca-9 (12-31-2008) · State v. Croston, 2008-Ca-00084 (10-27-2008)

3. ““1. In the prosecution of a criminal case, it is not essential that the venue of the crime be proven in express terms, provided it be established by all the facts and circumstances in the case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the crime was committed in the county and state as alleged in the indictment.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 111 Ohio App. 3d 718 - Village of Glenwillow v. Tomsick