Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 Ohio App. 125 - State v. Schaffer

113 Ohio App. 125 - State v. Schaffer’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
November 2007
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 2007

19 state decisions

7019601970198019902000decided

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.

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

  1. “[A] jury is not precluded from finding that malice and an intent to kill existed, when it appears that a young man in his early twenties ferociously attacked an elderly woman in her middle seventies and strangled her to death with his hands by using force of sufficient intensity to break the hyoid bone in two places, and to lacerate and mangle the throat and areas near thereto, culminating in hemorrhage of large volume. * * * Under such circumstances, the hands may be found to be the equivalent of a deadly weapon, and to constitute instruments likely to produce death when viciously employed to strangle.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “as that term is used in the ordinary sense.”
    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.