State v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2021
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · State v. Bradley · Yarborough v. Gentry · State v. Cook · Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. City of Cleveland
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial court did not notify Appellant at sentencing he would or could be required to pay court-appointed counsel fees, did not make an explicit finding Appellant has or reasonably may be expected to have the means to pay court-appointed Licking County, Case No. 2019 CA 00029 5 counsel fees pursuant to R.C. 2941.51(D), and did not specify the amount of appointed- counsel fees Appellant can or reasonably may be expected to pay”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rhodman
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.