124 Ohio App. 3d 746 - State v. Barnett’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
August 2015
most recently cited
18 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Carter · 147 Ohio St. 263 - State v. Nevius · 8 Ohio App. 3d 145 - State v. Mathews · United States v. Ingram · 83 Ohio App. 3d 474 - State v. Clelland
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e conclude it would be absurd to hold, without authority, that one county's State's Attorney could bind another county's State's Attorney without the latter's knowledge and approval regardless of court approval.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bryant · State v. Bryant“the county prosecutor's agency authority extends to the county line when investigating and prosecuting crimes. Thus, the county prosecutor is an agent of the state with respect to crimes committed in his county.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bryant“one county's prosecutor has the actual or apparent authority to prohibit a defendant's prosecution in a second county for an unrelated offense without the second county's consent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bryant
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.