State v. Kidder’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 485 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 492 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably State v. Barnes (2002), State v. Landrum (1990)
1 federal appellate · 485 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 Harrington v. California · Illinois v. Allen · United States v. Hasting · Beck v. Alabama · Keeble v. United States
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 492 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * [A]n offense may be a lesser included offense of another only if (i) the offense is a crime of lesser degree than the other, (ii) the offense of the greater degree cannot, as statutorily defined, ever be committed without the offense of the lesser degree also being committed, and (iii) some element of the greater offense is not required to prove the commission of the lesser offense. Even though so defined, a charge on the lesser included offense is not required, unless the trier of fact could reasonably reject an affirmative defense and could reasonably find against the state and for the accused upon one or more of the elements of the crime charged, and for the state and against the accused on the remaining elements, which by themselves would sustain a conviction upon the lesser included offense.” See, also, State v. Kuchmak (1953), 159 Ohio St. 363 , 366-367, 50 O.O. 327 , 328-329, 112 N.E.2d 371 , 372-373.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When considering whether error is harmless, our judgment is based on our own reading of the record and on what we determine is the probable impact the statement had on the jury.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A criminal defendant is entitled to a lesser-included-offense instruction, however, only where the evidence warrants it. * * * Thus, the trial court's task is two fold: first, it must determine what constitutes a lesser included offense of the charged crime; second, it must examine the facts and ascertain whether the jury could reasonably conclude that the evidence supports a conviction for the lesser offense and not the greater.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.