30 Ohio App. 2d 96 - State v. Agner’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2021
15 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 112 Ohio App. 208 - State v. Cloud
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Arguments of counsel in the trial of a lawsuit are permitted for the sole purpose of aiding the jury in analyzing the evidence and thus assisting it in determining the facts of the case. Arguments made to incite a jury to convict to meet a public demand are inimical to the basic rights of a defendant, since they prevent him from having a fair and impartial trial to which he is entitled under the law. * * *” See, also, State v. Agner (1972), 30 Ohio App. 2d 96 , 59 O.O. 2d 208, 283 N.E. 2d 443 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Beuke“the means of knowing this reputation, testified that she knew it, testified what it was, and testified whether she would believe the witness under oath.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“informant's general reputation for truth and veracity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.