29 Ohio App. 3d 215 - State v. Buell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A defendant must demonstrate three factors in order to sustain a challenge to a jury-selection procedure on the basis that the procedure involves a violation of the fair cross-section requirement. First, it must be shown that the group alleged to be excluded is a distinctive group in the community. The second requirement to be demonstrated is that the representation of this group in venires from which juries are selected is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community. Finally, the defendant is required to show that the underrepresentation is due to the systematic exclusion of the group in the jury-selection process.” (Citations omitted.) Id. at 217 , 29 OBR at 262, 504 N.E.2d at 1162-1163 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 145 Ohio App. 3d 58 - Nelson v. Ford Motor Co.

2. “[P]rior convictions are not elements of the pending charge because the number of times the accused has been previously convicted of violating R.C. 4511.19 is not in any way relevant to the question of whether the accused again committed the offense. The statutory language of R.C. 4511.19 and 4511.99 reflects a legislative intent to make prior convictions a part of the sentencing procedure, not one of the elements required to sustain a conviction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Ferrell, Unpublished Decision (2-9-2004)

3. “`[u]nless prejudice to the defendant or the systematic and intentional exclusion of a group is shown, [a reviewing court] will not reverse a judgment because of minor and technical defects in jury-selection procedures.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Wood, Unpublished Decision (7-24-2006)