Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 19 Ohio App. 3d 214 - State v. Weber

19 Ohio App. 3d 214 - State v. Weber’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably 111 Ohio App. 3d 309 - State v. Cope (1996), State v. Radcliff (Slip Opinion) (2015)

2 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

801984199020002010decided

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 City of Pepper Pike v. Doe

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. ““1. The trial courts in Ohio have jurisdiction to order expungement and sealing of records in a criminal case where the charges are dismissed with prejudice prior to trial by the party initiating the proceedings. “2. The trial courts have authority to order expungement where such unusual and exceptional circumstances make it appropriate to exercise jurisdiction over the matter. When exercising this power, the court should use a balancing test which weighs the privacy interest of the defendant against the government’s legitimate need to maintain records of criminal proceedings.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]t is quite true that R.C. 2925.11(D) relieves the offender from having to report the conviction himself as a 'criminal record' when he responds to inquiries from employers and others, . . . this is neither the theoretical nor functional equivalent of sealing the record against all persons except those expressly authorized [under Ohio law].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “does not constitute a criminal record and need not be reported by the person . . . in response to any inquiries about the person's criminal record,”
    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.