State v. Richard’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently January 2025
17 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. Thompkins · 20 Ohio App. 3d 172 - State v. Martin · State v. Dehass · 147 Ohio St. 351 - State v. Conley
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Quite simply, whatever thoughts that appellant was having about the neighbor girl were never made known to the potential victim or her family until the police informed them on August 29, 1996. Without a threat made known to the potential victim or her family, a key element of both the aggravated menacing and menacing by stalking statutes is missing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“I should just kill her, maybe that will end it all.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This legislative history demonstrates that prior to 1974 an offender convicted of menacing had to threaten to injure the person to whom he was speaking. After the 1974 amendment, the offender could also threaten to injure an immediate relative of the person to whom he was speaking. In addition, the general rules of statutory construction require a criminal statute to be strictly construed against the state and liberally construed in favor of the accused. State v. Conley (1947), 147 Ohio St. 351 , 353 , 34 O.O. 279, 280 , 71 N.E.2d 275 , 276.”
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.