2 Ohio App. 3d 483 - State v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
February 1991
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Long · 52 Ohio App. 2d 1 - State v. Craft · State v. Manago · State v. Roberts · Sabo v. State
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * In that case the Supreme Court of Ohio held that a jury instruction which requires the defendant to prove self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence does not constitute plain error unless, but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly would have been otherwise. Although State v. Long, supra, and the case sub judice both concern instructions which incorrectly place the burden of proof upon the accused, the case can be distinguished. The instructions given in State v. Long, supra, required the defendant to prove self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence; the instructions given in the case sub judice required appellant to prove alibi beyond a reasonable doubt. Both instructions were incorrect, but in requiring that appellant prove his alibi beyond a reasonable doubt the court below placed a heavier burden upon him than was placed upon the defendant in State v. Long, supra. Thus, the court below committed a greater error. The erroneous instruction ‘could not have done other than mislead the jury,’ State v. McRae (Feb. 27, 1980), Hamilton App. No. C-790240, unreported, and could have led to a ‘manifest miscarriage of justice.’ * * * ” Walker , at 484, 2 OBR at 611, 442 N.E.2d at 1320-1321 .”
1 later decision 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.