Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 107 Ohio App. 3d 288 - State v. Ebersole

107 Ohio App. 3d 288 - State v. Ebersole’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
1
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

63 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably State v. Downie (2009), 148 Ohio App. 3d 488 - State v. Vordenberge (2002)

63 state decisions

2601995200020102020decided

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 Faretta v. California · Von Moltke v. Gillies · 45 Ohio St. 2d 366 - State v. Gibson · United States v. Fazzini · 17 Ohio App. 3d 216 - City of Garfield Heights v. Brewer

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

  1. “[w]aiver of counsel shall be in open court and the advice and waiver shall be recorded as provided in Rule 22.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Simply put, although appellant's actions of failing to notify his attorney of his change of address and not contacting his court-appointed counsel or the court between January 1994 and his apprehension in January 1995 are not condoned by us, neither will we condone the trial court's action denying a defendant court-appointed counsel when, prior to the denial, the trial court fails to inform the defendant of the consequences of his action. In other words, the constitutional requirements of a valid waiver delineated in Faretta [v. California (1975), 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 ], must still be articulated to the defendant: a defendant must know that his failure to contact his attorney will result in no further appointed counsel and if this happens, unless he can afford an attorney, he must represent himself and, also, be informed that there are dangers inherent in self-representation.”
    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.