149 Ohio App. 3d 541 - State v. Ruby’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably 181 Ohio App. 3d 292 - State v. Stevenson (2009), State v. Davis (2018)
50 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 Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Thompkins · State v. Jenks · Neil v. Biggers
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Constructive possession exists when an individual is able to knowingly exercise dominion or control over an object, even though it is not within his immediate physical possession.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Furthermore, 'readily usable drugs in close proximity to an accused may constitute sufficient circumstantial evidence to support a finding of constructive possession.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Possession may be actual or constructive.”
3 later decisions 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.