107 Ohio App. 3d 551 - State v. Chagaris’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably 125 Ohio App. 3d 456 - State v. Swiger (1998), State v. Lawson (2009)
42 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 Berkemer v. McCarty · State v. Williams · City of Akron v. Sharpe
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) Initial appearances and preliminary hearings conducted pursuant to Crim.R. 5. “(b) Arraignments conducted pursuant to Crim.R. 10. “(c) Proceedings at which a plea may be entered in accordance with Crim.R. 11. A magistrate may accept and enter not guilty pleas in felony cases, and guilty, not guilty, and no contest pleas in misdemeanor cases. In no instance shall a magistrate make a determination of guilt or innocence, or recommend or impose a sentence. “(d) Pretrial conferences conducted pursuant to Crim.R. 17.1. “(e) Proceedings to establish bail pursuant to Crim.R. 46. “(f) Motions filed pursuant to Crim.R. 47 over which the magistrate has authority under these rules.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Crim.R. 19 places explicit limitations on the magistrate’s authority, and it does not authorize a magistrate to determine dispositive matters. Because a motion to suppress evidence is a dispositive motion, it is not one of the Crim.R. motions over which a Crim.R. 19 magistrate is authorized to preside.” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Recognizing that `detention, not questioning, is the evil' at issue, * * * so long as the traffic stop is valid, `any questioning which occurs during the detention, even if unrelated to the scope of the detention, is valid so long as the questioning does not improperly extend the duration of the detention.'”
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.