Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 OHIOST2D 88 - State v. Draggo

State v. Draggo’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

189
cited by 189 later decisions
1
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 182 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 189 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Headley (1983), State v. Beuke (1988)

6 federal appellate · 182 state decisions

68019811990200020102020decided

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 State v. Williams · Carbo v. United States · 147 Ohio St. 263 - State v. Nevius · 28 Ohio App. 2d 77 - State v. Loucks · State v. Winters

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

  1. “[t]he trial of a criminal case in this state shall be held in a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, and in the territory of which the offense or any element of the offense was committed.”
    19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * In any trial, in any court, the party accused shall be allowed * * * a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed * * “(A) The trial of a criminal case in this state shall be held in a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, and in the territory of which the offense or any element of the offense was committed.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “R.C. 2901.12 (G) and (H) are statutory reflections of the modern mobility of criminals to perform unlawful deeds over vast geographical boundaries. The above-noted statutory provisions effectuate a sensible, efficient approach to justice by permitting one court to hear a matter which has roots in several court jurisdictions.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.