135 Ohio App. 3d 250 - State v. Berry’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably 146 Ohio App. 3d 445 - State v. Widder (2001), 175 Ohio App. 3d 318 - State v. Davis (2008)
29 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 14 Ohio App. 3d 394 - State v. Saltzer · 108 Ohio App. 3d 671 - City of Dayton v. Salmon
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`[a] trial court must make the necessary findings as required by R.C. 2953.52 (B)(2) and weigh the interests of the parties to the expungement[.]'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“{¶9} “(A)(2) Any person, against whom a no bill is entered by a grand jury, may apply to the court for an order to seal his official records in the case. Except as provided in section 2953.61 of the Revised Code, the application may be filed at any time after the expiration of two years after the date on which the foreman or deputy foreman of the grand jury reports to the court that the grand jury has reported a no bill. {¶10} “(B)(1) Upon the filing of an application pursuant to division (A) of this section, the court shall set a date for a hearing and shall notify the prosecutor in the case of the hearing on the application. The prosecutor may object to the granting of the application by filing an objection with the court prior to the date set for the hearing. The prosecutor shall specify in the objection the reasons he believes justify a denial of the application. {¶11} “(2) The court shall do each of the following: {¶12} “(a) Determine whether * * * a no bill was returned in the case and a period of two years or a longer period as required by section 2953.61 of the Revised Code has expired from the date of the report to the court of that no bill by the foreman or deputy foreman of the grand jury; {¶13} “(b) Determine whether criminal proceedings are pending against the person; {¶14} “(c) If the prosecutor has filed an objection in accordance with division (B)(1) of this section, consider the reasons against granting the application specified by the prosecutor in the objec”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“`the trial court must, in pertinent part, "weigh the interests of the person having the official records pertaining to the case sealed against the legitimate needs, if any, of the government to maintain those records.”
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.