State v. Eberhardt’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1995
3 federal appellate · 9 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 Patton v. United States · 219 F. Supp. 164 - United States v. Sams · Haith v. United States · Moore v. State
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In other words, it is not the absence of the judge, but rather a prejudicial occurrence during his absence that may create error, at least when the judge’s absence is with the consent of counsel. * * * ” State v. Eberhardt, 320 Ohio Misc. 39 , 282 N.E.2d 62, 64 (1972).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. James“When the parties to a criminal case have duly waived the presence of the trial judge during voir dire and the selection of the jury, and no prejudice is shown to have resulted from the judge's absence, such absence is not ground for a new trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Peri v. State
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.