117 Ohio App. 3d 561 - State v. Stepp’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
74 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably 137 Ohio App. 3d 336 - State v. Mendoza (2000), State v. Paskins (2022)
74 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 20 Ohio App. 3d 172 - State v. Martin · State v. Bridgeman · State v. Eskridge · State v. Sellards · State v. Coleman
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`Participation in criminal intent may be inferred from presence, companionship and conduct before and after the offense is committed.'”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage““To ‘aid’ is to assist and to ‘abet’ is to incite or encourage. Mere approval or acquiescence, without expressed concurrence or the doing of something to contribute to an unlawful act, is not an aiding or abetting of the act. * * * [I]n order to aid or abet, whether by words, acts, encouragement, support or presence, there must be something more than a failure to object unless one is under a legal duty to object. “The state may demonstrate that an accused is guilty of aiding and abetting by direct or circumstantial evidence. Participation in criminal intent may be inferred from presence, companionship and conduct before and after the offense is committed.” (Citations omitted.) State v. Stepp (1997), 117 Ohio App.3d 561, 568-569 , 690 N.E.2d 1342 , 1347-1348”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“A charge of complicity may be stated in terms of this section, or in terms of the principal offense.”
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.