156 Ohio App. 3d 241 - State v. Baron’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Yust v. Henkel (In re Henkel) (2013), 161 Ohio App. 3d 127 - State v. Kennedy (2005)
28 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 State v. Thompkins · Smith v. Doe · State v. Cook · State v. Comer · State v. Eppinger
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“II. R.C. 2950.01 et seq., as applied to Mr. Hotchkiss violates Art. I, Sec. 10 of the United Sates Constitution as ex post facto legislation and violates Art. II , Sec. 28 of the Ohio Constitution as retroactive legislation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The person has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to committing a sexually oriented offense that is not a registration-exempt sexually oriented offense and is likely to engage in the future in one or more sexually oriented offenses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The evidence is insufficient, as a matter of law, to prove by `clear and convincing evidence' that Mr. McCown is likely to engage in the future' in one or more sexually oriented offense[s].”
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.