State v. Francis’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
185 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 185 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State v. Clark (2008), State v. Romero (Slip Opinion) (2019)
185 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. Stewart · Juidice v. Vail · G. M. Leasing Corp. v. United States · Fruchtman v. Kenton · Bachner v. United States
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 185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a nine-year delay in filing a motion to withdraw a plea was an insufficient basis alone to deny the motion. Id. at ¶ 41. {¶ 24} However, the Supreme Court left open the possibility that based upon the particular circumstances of a case, a trial court may deny a motion to withdraw a plea filed pursuant to R.C. 2943.031(D) solely on the basis of timeliness. This is demonstrated by the Court's reasoning that depending on the particular facts, the timeliness of a motion to withdraw could be an important factor. For example, a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Reyes“The more time that passes between the defendant's plea and the filing of the motion to withdraw it, the more probable it is that evidence will become stale and that witnesses will be unavailable. The state has an interest in maintaining the finality of a conviction that has been considered a closed case for a long period of time. It is certainly reasonable to require a criminal defendant who seeks to withdraw a plea to do so in a timely fashion rather than delaying for an unreasonable length of time.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“would affect [her] rights in this country,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.