148 Ohio St. 473 - State v. Petro’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
137 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably 20 Ohio App. 3d 172 - State v. Martin (1983), State v. Sage (1987)
137 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.
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he fact that one of the parties fails to call a witness who has some knowledge of the matter under investigation may be commented upon.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is the minds of the jurors [* ] and not the minds of the judges of an appellate court that are to be convinced.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In the per curiam opinion in the case of State v. DeRighter, 145 Ohio St., 552, 556 , 62 N. E. (2d), 332, it was held: “ ‘Hence, it is clear that the purpose of a bill of particulars is not to disclose the state’s evidence but simply to state specifically the nature of the offense charged.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.