116 Ohio App. 3d 771 - State v. Lampkin’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 2026
9 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 State v. Long · State v. Underwood
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“rather than the State or the City of Lorain in the underlying criminal case. Lozano at 174 . In Lampkin , the Sixth District Court of Appeals found plain error when the trial court submitted a verdict form containing the statutory description of the offense but omitted the essential elements of the offense on the verdict form. However, the court stated in Lampkin :”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]e can find nothing which requires or suggests that the statutory definition of the offense be included on a jury verdict form”
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.