Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 153 Ohio App. 3d 1 - State v. Strohm

153 Ohio App. 3d 1 - State v. Strohm’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 101 Ohio App. 3d 428 - State v. Polick · 80 Ohio App. 3d 88 - State v. Wagner · 78 Ohio App. 3d 847 - State v. Stevens · 109 Ohio App. 3d 877 - State v. Bacon

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

  1. “Although R.C. 2929.22 does not set forth requirements for imposing maximum or consecutive sentences, it does set *Page 17 forth factors that must be considered when determining whether a jail term is appropriate. The failure to consider these factors is an abuse of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Unlike the imposition of maximum or consecutive sentences for felonies, the Ohio Revised Code does not provide any requirements for imposing maximum or consecutive sentences of misdemeanors, other than limiting the total amount of months that may be served to 18.”
    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.