State v. Wiles’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 532 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 542 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with this rule or with an order issued pursuant to this rule, the court may order such party to permit the discovery or inspection, grant a continuance, or prohibit the party from introducing in evidence the material not disclosed, or it may make such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 80 Ohio App. 3d 211 - State v. Adkins · State v. Muszynec, Unpublished Decision (10-19-2006)

2. “It is well established that a sentencing judge may take into account facts introduced at trial relating to other charges, even ones of which the defendant has been acquitted.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. McGowan, Unpublished Decision (5-12-2004) · State v. Martin, Unpublished Decision (3-1-2007)

3. “an appellate court presumes that a trial court considered nothing but relevant and competent evidence in reaching its verdict,”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Cleveland v. Mincy · T.D. v. Ullom