137 Ohio App. 3d 260 - State v. Dick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 state decisions

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.

1. “"The doctrine [of res judicata] operates to preclude a subsequent action both on claims that were actually litigated and also those that could have been litigated in a previous action. An existing final judgment or decree between the parties to litigation is conclusive as to all claims which were or might have been litigated in a first lawsuit. Moreover, in the context of post-conviction relief, this Court has repeatedly held that a defendant's failure to appeal a judgment of conviction is a res judicata bar to a subsequent attempt to litigate issues that could have been raised on a direct appeal."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Lucerno, Unpublished Decision (10-18-2007)

2. “RIV” is not defined in the record but generally relates to reports of institutional violations. 4 . In Dick , the Third District Court of Appeals rejected the argument that R.C. 2950.09(C)(2)(b)(v) provides the exclusive mechanism by which a sexual predator determination may be appealed. However, it did so without analysis; instead, the Dick court rejected the argument solely because the state”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 147 Ohio App. 3d 505 - State v. Philpott

3. “[t]he fact that the trial court's decision was based on what was ultimately determined to be an incorrect statement of the law is of no consequence, as the Supreme Court has held that `there is no exception in the doctrine of res judicata for merely erroneous judgments.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Davie, Unpublished Decision (3-10-2004)