State v. Chippendale’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

129 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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““If a general provision conflicts with a special or local provision, they shall be construed, if possible, so that effect is given to both. If the conflict between the provisions is irreconcilable, the special or local provision prevails as an exception to the general provision, unless the general provision is the later adoption and the manifest intent is that the general provision prevail.””

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 131 Ohio App. 3d 118 - State v. Hines · 127 Ohio App. 3d 96 - Thomas Steel, Inc. v. Wilson Bennett, Inc.

2. “R.C. 1.51 comes into play only when a general and a special provision constitute allied offenses of similar import and additionally do not constitute crimes committed separately or with a separate animus for each crime.”

   11 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Davis, Unpublished Decision (7-14-2004) · 98 Ohio App. 3d 262 - State v. Milliner

3. “that where the legislative intent is manifest that general and special provisions be applied coextensively and where the provisions are allied offenses of similar import, then the prosecution may charge on and try both, but the defendant may be sentenced upon his or her conviction for only one of the offenses.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hardy · State v. Csokmay, Unpublished Decision (3-22-2007)