Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 140 Ohio App. 3d 733 - State v. Noggle

140 Ohio App. 3d 733 - State v. Noggle’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
August 2025
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably 153 Ohio App. 3d 44 - State v. Coe (2003), 151 Ohio App. 3d 605 - State v. Martin (2003)

39 state decisions

190200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · United States v. Mendenhall · Gault · State v. Bradley

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

  1. “[W]e note that plain error cannot be used to negate a deliberate, tactical decision by trial counsel.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “{¶ 24} “A jury charge must be considered as a whole and a reviewing court must determine whether the jury charge probably misled the jury in a matter materially affecting the complaining party’s substantial rights.” State v. Noggle (2000), 140 Ohio App.3d 733, 750 , 749 N.E.2d 309 , citing Becker v. Lake Cty. Mem. Hosp. West (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 202, 208 , 560 N.E.2d 165, 171 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “debatable trial tactics do not constitute ineffective assistance of trial counsel.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.