29 Ohio App. 2d 142 - State v. Boham’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

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

1. ““The fourth and final error assigned is that the judgment from which the appeal is taken is against the manifest weight of the evidence on the issue of insanity * * * on * * the day on which the crime was committed. Defendant urges that the sole evidence at trial on the issue of insanity, at the time of the crime, was provided by Dr. Y<w meulen. This appears to be correct. Such a suggestion from defense counsel implies that since his testimony stands alone, the jury was required to conclude that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity. That position, if it really be the position of defendant, overlooks the fundamental point that a jury is not required to believe any witness, expert or otherwise. * * * “It is the function of a jury not a reviewing court to weigh evidence. A Court of Appeals will not disturb the finding of a trial jury on matters of evidence unless it clearly appears that the jury completely lost its way or was the victim of bias or prejudice. In this case, the jury was entitled to believe or disbelieve the expert, or to give such weight to his testimony as in their collective judgment it was entitled to receive. * * * ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 49 Ohio App. 2d 388 - State v. Smith