Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 14 Ohio App. 3d 385 - State v. Workman

14 Ohio App. 3d 385 - State v. Workman’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
4
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably State v. Eastham (1988), Philippine Export & Foreign Loan Guarantee Corp. v. Chuidian (1990)

45 state decisions

15019841990200020102020decided

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 Cupp v. Naughten · Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia · Globe Newspaper Company v. Superior Court for County of Norfolk · State v. Bridgeman · Ohio v. Wilkins

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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““* * * The child’s appearance, fear or composure, general demeanor and manner of answering, and any indication of coaching or instruction as to answers to be given are as significant as the words used in answering during the examination, to determine competency. * * *” Wilson, supra, at 532, 46 O.O. at 440, 103 N.E. 2d at 556.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “`A trial court can determine on a case-by-case basis whether closure is necessary to protect the welfare of a minor victim. Among the factors to be weighed are the minor victim's age, psychological maturity, and understanding, the nature of the crime, the desires of the victim, and the interests of parents and relatives.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “When the child is presented in court and the fact is revealed that the age of ten has not been reached, it is the duty of the trial judge to immediately examine the child, without the participation or interference of counsel, to determine the child's competency to testify.”
    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.