People v. Mersman’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2024
15 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 United States v. Lacey · People v. Abbott · Mach v. Stewart · People v. Veren · 119 Ohio App. 31 - State v. Strong
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the existence of which were the basis for his only defense to the charged offenses. 35 Accordingly, because Bondurant has not satisfied his burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is incomprehensible in all applications, his facial challenge to the statute based on ambiguity of the term”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Bondurant“Generally, curative instrue-tions issued after a prejudicial statement is made will remedy any harm caused by the statement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Davis“warranted only where the prejudice to the accused is too substantial to be remedied by other means.”
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.