Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 Ohio App. 3d 566 - State v. Mootispaw

110 Ohio App. 3d 566 - State v. Mootispaw’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably 121 Ohio App. 3d 451 - State v. Nievas (1997), Brown v. Konteh (2009)

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

1301996200020102020decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · State v. Jenks · State v. Hankerson · State v. Wolery · 28 Ohio App. 2d 29 - State v. Pruett

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

  1. “abet” means to incite or to encourage. State v. Mootispaw (1996), 110 Ohio App.3d 566 , 674 N.E.2d 1222 . A person’s mere association with the principal offender is not enough. However, the state may demonstrate a person’s aiding and abetting of another in the commission of a crime through both direct and circumstantial evidence and”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(A) No person, with purpose to deprive the owner of property or services, shall knowingly obtain or exert control over either the property or services in any of the following ways: {¶ 19} "(1) Without the consent of the owner or person authorized to give consent.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(A) No person, with purpose to deprive the owner of property or services, shall knowingly obtain or exert control over either the property or services in any of the following ways: {¶ 19}”
    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.