State v. Caraballo’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
272 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 274 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably State v. Stumpf (1987), State v. Boswell (2009)
272 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. Smith · 68 Ohio App. 2d 211 - State v. Peterseim · Kadwell v. United States
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 274 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The logic behind this precept is to discourage a defendant from pleading guilty to test the weight of potential reprisal, and later withdraw the plea if the sentence was unexpectedly severe.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A motion made pursuant to Crim.R. 32.1 is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and the good faith, credibility and weight of the movant's assertions in support of the motion are matters to be resolved by that court.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“While we recognize that a guilty plea must be knowing, intelligent and voluntary, appellant's own testimony established that he was not under the influence of any drug and that he understood the nature of the proceedings on the day in question. Further, we fail to see how the trial judge could have more thoroughly examined appellant's mental state relative to his plea. After complying with Crim.R. 11, the court again reviewed his mental awareness surrounding the plea at the hearing on this matter. We can, therefore, find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's action as appellant has not sustained his burden of proof required by Smith, supra. State v. Caraballo , 17 Ohio St.3d 66 , 67, 477 N.E.2d 627 (1985).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hutchison
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.