Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 Ohio App. 3d 256 - State v. Glover

17 Ohio App. 3d 256 - State v. Glover’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
3
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably 112 Ohio App. 3d 521 - State v. Hopfer (1996), 152 Ohio App. 3d 629 - State v. Condon (2003)

26 state decisions

11019841990200020102020decided

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 Connally v. General Construction Co. · Miller v. California · Coates v. City of Cincinnati · Colten v. Commonwealth of Kentucky · Hygrade Provision Co. v. Sherman

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

  1. “[a] criminal statute is not void for vagueness simply because it requires a person to conform to an imprecise but comprehensible normative standard,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 152 Ohio App. 3d 629 - State v. Condon · 112 Ohio App. 3d 521 - State v. Hopfer
  2. “men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. State v. Sommerfield, 14-07-09 (12-3-2007) · State v. Spencer
  3. ““(A) No person, except as authorized by law, shall treat a human corpse in a way that he knows would outrage reasonable family sensibilities. “(B) No person, except as authorized by law, shall treat a human corpse in a way that would outrage reasonable community sensibilities. “(C) Whoever violates division (A) of this section is guilty of abuse of a corpse, a misdemeanor of the second degree. Whoever violates division (B) of this section is guilty of gross abuse of a corpse, a felony of the fourth degree.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 65 Ohio App. 3d 24 - State v. Gardner · State v. Quinones, Unpublished Decision (12-12-2003)

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.