51 Ohio App. 2d 105 - State v. Bridgeman’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2023 · most notably Engle v. Isaac (1982), State v. Williford (1990)
41 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 Gregg v. Georgia · Woodson v. North Carolina · Jurek v. Texas · Proffitt v. Florida · Roberts v. Louisiana
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“all matters of law necessary for the information of the jury in giving its verdict . . .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““While it is solely the responsibility of the trial judge to give the law that governs the trial, such responsibility does not preclude counsel from questioning the panel on matters of applicable law so long as counsel states the law fairly and accurately, and couches it in language that makes it clear that the court is the final arbiter of the law. Counsel have a duty to select a jury that will not only properly decide the facts but apply the law given by the court to the facts as the jury finds them to be. Counsel may inquire of the panel whether it will hold the state to its burden of proving each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, if the judge so instructs the panel. Such latitude is inherent in the rule that permits counsel to supplement the court’s examination by further inquiry. To determine the bias, prejudice or partiality of the voir dire panel on the law and the facts is the duty of counsel no less than that of the court. Such inquiry of the panel should be sufficiently flexible to include matters of applicable law not reached by the court. Counsel should be permitted to probe into areas where the responses to the court’s questions were incompletely or hesitantly given. The trial judge must allow for the selection of a jury that will evaluate the evidence presented by the parties and apply the law given by the court fairly and impartially.” State v. Bridgeman (1977), 51 Ohio App. 2d 105, 110 , 5 O.O. 3d 275, 277-278, 366 N.E. 2d 1378, 1383 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"*** Any person called as a juror for the trial of any cause shall be examined *** as to his qualifications The court may permit the attorney for the defendant *** and the attorney for the state to conduct the examination of the prospective jurors or may itself conduct the examination. In the latter event, the court shall permit the state and defense to supplement the examination by further inquiry."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lorraine
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.