Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 Ohio App. 3d 135 - State v. Dotson

35 Ohio App. 3d 135 - State v. Dotson’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
June 2023
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably State v. Skatzes (2004), 83 Ohio App. 3d 474 - State v. Clelland (1992)

35 state decisions

15019871990200020102020decided

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 State v. Perryman · 12 Ohio St. 2d 17 - Cassidy v. Glossip · Smith v. Klem · 70 Ohio St. 2d 213 - State ex rel. Smith v. Court of Common Pleas · 112 Ohio St. 567 - Baltimore & Ohio Rd. Co. v. Baillie

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

  1. “(A) No person, acting with the kind of culpability required for the commission of an offense, shall do any of the following: (1) Solicit or procure another to commit the offense; (2) Aid or abet another in committing the offense; (3) Conspire with another to commit the offense in violation of section 2923.01 of the Revised Code ; (4) Cause an innocent or irresponsible person to commit the offense. (B) It is no defense to a charge under this section that no person with whom the accused was in complicity has been convicted as a principal offender * * * (F) Whoever violates this section is guilty of complicity in the commission of an offense, and shall be prosecuted and punished as if he were a principal offender. A charge of complicity may be stated in terms of this section, or in terms of the principal offense.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We are cited to no authority that city police cannot investigate criminal activity occurring in areas outside the city limits. The drug traffic does not stop at town boundaries and may have serious damaging effects upon the population of the town. We know of no reason that a city or town cannot protect its citizens and schools by initiating and conducting investigations in nearby areas. The only problem would appear to be whether the city wished to finance such investigations, a matter for city council and not for the courts.”
    2 later decisions 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.