55 Ohio App. 2d 267 - State v. Hann’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “After participating in a forgery, defendant continued to allow Waugh to operate the vehicle. Defendant knew that pursuit and the attendant risks inherent in high speed flight might follow. He could, therefore, properly be held responsible as an aider and abettor for the acts of his companion in attempting to make good their escape.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Clark, Unpublished Decision (7-13-2004) · State of Iowa v. Orlando David Rodriguez

2. “[The d]efendant had a strong, common interest with Waugh in the operation of the vehicle and this interest was not remote or passive. Defendant had a part in and shared in the benefits obtained from the operation of the vehicle. Defendant procured the vehicle and attempted to dispose of incriminating evidence during the final chase. He was more than just a passive, quiescent, disinterested passenger.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Clark, Unpublished Decision (7-13-2004)

3. “[W]hether a passenger in an automobile can participate in the operation of a motor vehicle and thereby recklessly cause the death of another and whether that passenger may be guilty of the crime of aggravated vehicular homicide as an aider and abetter of the actual driver.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Clark, Unpublished Decision (7-13-2004)