Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 16 Ohio App. 3d 251 - State v. Anderson

16 Ohio App. 3d 251 - State v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
December 2008
most recently cited

18 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Albernaz v. United States · State v. Fanning · State v. Logan · State v. Bickerstaff

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

  1. ““[T]he offense of child endangering has, under the definition set forth in R.C. 2919.22(B)(1), been marked by the legislature with certain attributes so unique that it must be construed as a crime wholly separate and distinct from that of felonious assault. In this regard, we note specifically that the legislature has chosen to bestow special protection upon children by crafting an offense that, in essence, involves the infliction of torture or cruel physical abuse on those who have yet to attain the age of majority. Because the peculiar elements at the heart of the crime play no essential part in the definition of felonious assault under R.C. 2903.11(A), it is fair to say that an act of felonious assault will not perforce result in an act of child endangering.” Id. See, also, State v. Parish (Oct. 31, 1995), Hancock App. No. 5-95-11, unreported, 1995 WL 641268 .”
    2 later decisions 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.