State v. Moritz’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
246 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 246 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Treesh (2001), State v. Landrum (1990)
246 state decisions
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 Bruton v. United States · Griffin v. California · Lockett v. Ohio · Harrington v. California · Holloway v. Arkansas
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 246 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“so overwhelming, and the prejudicial effect of the [subject statement] is so insignificant by comparison, that it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the improper use of the admission was harmless error.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“'In Bruton, the Supreme Court held that in a joint trial of two defendants, a confession of one co-defendant who did not testify could not be admitted into evidence even with a limiting instruction that the confession could only be used against the confessing defendant. The rationale of Bruton was that the introduction of a potentially unreliable confession of one defendant which implicates another defendant without being subject to cross-examination deprives the latter defendant of his right to confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“(T)he Bruton rule applies with equal force to all statements that tend significantly to incriminate a co-defendant, whether or not he is actually named in the statement. The fact that the incrimination amounts to a link in a chain of circumstances rather than a direct accusation cannot dispose of the applicability of the Bruton rule. Just as one can be convicted on circumstantial evidence, one can be circumstantially accused. Fox v. State (Ind.App.1979) [ 179 Ind.App. 267 ], 384 N.E.2d 1159 , 1170. State v. Moritz , 63 Ohio St.2d 150 , 155, 407 N.E.2d 1268 , 1272 (1980).”
3 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.