Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 Ohio App. 3d 104 - State v. Clark

43 Ohio App. 3d 104 - State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Eley · Schull Construction Co. v. Board of Regents of Education

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

  1. “{¶ 37} “No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another when the offender purposely compels the other person to submit by force or threat of force.” {¶ 38} “ ‘Sexual conduct’ means vaginal intercourse between a male and female; * * * fellatio * * * between persons regardless of sex. * * *.” R.C. 2907.01(A). “ ‘Force’ means any violence, compulsion, or constraint physically exerted by any means upon or against a person or thing.” R.C. 2901.01(A)(1). “A person acts purposely when it is his specific intention to cause a certain result, or, when the gist of the offense is a prohibition against conduct of a certain nature, regardless of what the offender intends to accomplish thereby, it is his specific intention to engage in conduct of that nature.” R.C. 2901.22(A).”
    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.