3 Ohio App. 3d 265 - State v. Grimsley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 62 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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We hold that R.C. 4511.19 imposes strict criminal liability. We find in the language chosen by the legislature a plainly indicated purpose to do so, because the overall design of the statute is to protect against the hazards to life, limb and property created by drivers who have consumed so much alcohol that their faculties are impaired." (Emphasis added.) Id. at 267 , 3 OBR at 311, 444 N.E.2d at 1074 . See, also, Cleary, supra, 22 Ohio St.3d at 199 , 22 OBR at 351, 490 N.E.2d at 574 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Dunn, Unpublished Decision (12-7-2006) · 74 Ohio App. 3d 817 - State v. Keeton

2. ““In all criminal cases pending in courts of record in this state, the defendant may waive a trial by jury and be tried by the court without a jury. Such waiver by a defendant, shall be in writing, signed by the defendant, and filed in said cause and made a part of the record thereof. It shall be entitled in the court and cause, and in substance as follows: T ..., defendant in the above cause, hereby voluntarily waive and relinquish my right to a trial by jury, and elect to be tried by a Judge of the Court in which the said cause may be pending. I fully understand that under the laws of this state, I have a constitutional right to a trial by jury.’ “Such waiver of trial by jury must be made in open court after the defendant has been arraigned and has had opportunity to consult with counsel. Such waiver may be withdrawn by the defendant at any time before the commencement of the trial.” (Emphasis added.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Fafrak · 68 Ohio App. 3d 388 - State v. Slack

3. “Assuming arguendo that the evidence was sufficient to establish such a complete break between appellant’s consciousness as Robin and her consciousness as Jennifer that Jennifer alone was in control (despite years of therapy), nevertheless the evidence fails to establish the fact that Jennifer was either unconscious or acting involuntarily. There was only one person driving the car and only one person accused of drunken driving. It is immaterial whether she was in one state of consciousness or another, so long as in the personality then controlling her behavior, she was conscious and her actions were a product of her own volition. The evidence failed to demonstrate that Jennifer was unconscious or otherwise acting involuntarily.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1 Neb. Ct. App. 681 - State v. Halcomb · United States v. Denny-Shaffer