Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 170 OHIOAPP3D 331 - State v. Baker

State v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 2022

20 state decisions

140200620102020decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · State v. Foster · State v. Grubb · State v. French · 6 Ohio App. 3d 1 - State v. White

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

  1. “The purpose and effect of a motion to suppress and a motion in limine are distinct. A `motion to suppress' is defined as a `device used to eliminate from the trial of a criminal case evidence which has been secured illegally, generally in violation of the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure), the Fifth Amendment (privilege against self incrimination), or the Sixth Amendment (right to assistance of counsel, right of confrontation etc.), of *Page 30 U.S. Constitution.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] decision on a motion in limine is a pretrial, preliminary, anticipatory ruling on the admissibility of evidence.”
    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.