Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 OHIOST2D 126 - State v. Logan

State v. Logan’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

916
cited by 916 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 891 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 916 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Ohio v. Johnson (1984), State v. Maurer (1984)

11 federal appellate · 891 state decisions

4030197919801990200020102020decided

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 People v. Daniels · Holt v. Alleghany Corp. · 35 Cal. 2d 175 - People v. Knowles · People v. Chessman · State v. Buggs

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

  1. “(a) Where the restraint or movement of the victim is merely incidental to a separate underlying crime, there exists no separate animus sufficient to sustain separate convictions; however, where the restraint is prolonged, the confinement is secretive, or the movement is substantial so as to demonstrate a significance independent of the other offense, there exists a separate animus as to each offense sufficient to support separate convictions; (b) Where the asportation or restraint of the victim subjects the victim to a substantial increase in risk of harm separate and apart from that involved in the underlying crime, there exists a separate animus as to each offense sufficient to support separate convictions.”
    48 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “inferred from the surrounding circumstances.”
    33 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““(A) Where the same conduct by defendant can be construed to constitute two or more allied offenses of similar import, the indictment or information may contain counts for all such offenses, but the defendant may be convicted of only one. “(B) Where the defendant’s conduct constitutes two or more offenses of dissimilar import, or where his conduct results in two or more offenses of the same or similar kind committed separately or with a separate animus as to each, the indictment or information may contain counts for all such offenses, and the defendant may be convicted of all of them.””
    32 later decisions 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.