106 Ohio App. 3d 696 - State v. Powers’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2014
3 federal appellate · 9 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 Nicholas v. United States · Schade v. Carnegie Body Co. · State v. Kidder · Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin v. New York · State v. Howard
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To preserve for appeal the issue of error in the instruction to the jury, an appellant must cite an objection to the instruction on the trial record. * * * A fundamental rule of appellate review is that a reviewing court will not consider as error any issue that a party was aware of but failed to bring to the trial court's attention. Thus, a party has waived the right to contest an issue on appeal if that issue was in existence prior to or at the time of trial and the party did not raise it at the appropriate time in the court below.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Ohio courts have held that `the danger of prejudice to defendants is slight where a juror's view of defendants in custody is brief, inadvertent, and outside of the courtroom.'”
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.