63 Ohio App. 3d 183 - State v. King’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) discloses a strong probability that it will change the result if a new trial is granted, (2) has been discovered since the trial, (3) is such as could not in the exercise of due diligence have been discovered before the trial, (4) is material to the issues, (5) is not merely cumulative to former evidence, and (6) does not merely impeach or contradict the former evidence.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Georgekopoulos, Unpublished Decision (9-28-2005) · State v. Young

2. “standing alone or weighed against the testimony of Drs. Cassel and Sherman discloses no possibility that the testimony, of [sic] offered, would have changed the result.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Young

3. “[a]ccident or surprise which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Young