Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 OHIOST3D 210 - State v. Johnson

State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

422
cited by 422 later decisions
4
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 420 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 422 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably State v. Perez (2009), State v. Powell (2012)

2 federal appellate · 420 state decisions

2200200620102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Faretta v. California · State v. Bradley · Wainwright v. Witt

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

  1. “usually cannot be said to have been error unless the evidence sought is so prejudicial * * * that failure to object essentially defaults the case to the state. Otherwise, defense counsel must so consistently fail to use objections, despite numerous and clear reasons for doing so, that counsel's failure cannot reasonably have been said to have been part of a trial strategy or tactical choice.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'limited judicial duty arises only if the allegations are sufficiently specific; vague or general objections do not trigger the duty to investigate further.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[c]orroboration of victim testimony in rape cases is not required”
    5 later decisions 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.