33 Ohio App. 3d 282 - State v. Talbert’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “" * * * Rule 613(B) preconditions admission of a prior inconsistent statement on a witness's opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party's opportunity to interrogate on the statement. The rule does not do away with the necessity of laying a foundation, a procedure most easily accomplished at the time the witness is cross-examined. * * *"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Neal

2. “[I]f her [the victim's] testimony and credibility is to be attacked through the device of prior inconsistent statements under Evid. R. 613(B), the reaction of that witness when confronted with the contrary statements must be seen by the jury. * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. McKinnon, Unpublished Decision (6-24-2004)

3. “* * * there is a 'manifest necessity' to do so, or to serve 'the ends of public justice' Furthermore, the trial courts are invested with authority to determine this issue in the exercise of their 'sound discretion.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 67 Ohio App. 3d 789 - State v. Warren