Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 39 Ohio App. 3d 24 - State v. Smith

39 Ohio App. 3d 24 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 2013

10 state decisions

401987199020002010decided

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 2 Ohio App. 3d 465 - State v. Winkelman

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

  1. ““Since a fundamental distinction exists between a disability based on a conviction and one based on a pending indictment, we hold the former to be outside the scope of Winkelman . Thus, no prior notice is required where the underlying disability is based upon a former conviction. The conviction itself puts the defendant on notice. “A defendant’s actual knowledge of the disability is not an essential element of the offense charged under R.C. 2923.13(A)(3) when the disability is based on a prior conviction.” (Emphasis added.)”
    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.