68 Ohio App. 2d 151 - State v. Kent’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 57 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““(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.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 70 Ohio App. 2d 20 - State v. Moralevitz · 62 Ohio App. 3d 359 - State v. Thrower

2. ““The allied offense statute does not mean that persons cannot be either indicted, tried or found guilty of multiple offenses, even when they are classified as allied offenses. See State v. Osborne (1976), 49 Ohio St. 2d 135, 144 [ 3 O.O.3d 79 ], vacated on other grounds (1978), 438 U.S. 911 * * *. “The allied offense statute merely provides that where allied offenses are present, the person can only be convicted of one of the offenses. Conviction in this context means a judgment of conviction. “A judgment of conviction has been defined as a plea or verdict of guilty and the sentence imposed. Crim. R. 32(B); State v. Henderson (1979), 58 Ohio St. 2d 171 [ 12 O.O.3d 177 ]. Thus the sentence imposed completes the judgment of conviction. When we speak of the allied offense doctrine, we are speaking of offenses for which an individual may be sentenced. In reality, the allied offense statute is a sentencing vehicle.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. City of Cleveland v. Kufrin

3. “‘When a defendant enters a guilty plea to multiple offenses of similar import and the trial court accepts the plea, the trial court must conduct a hearing before entering a judgment of conviction and make a determination as to whether there were allied offenses of similar import committed with a single animus; whether there were offenses committed separately or with a separate animus as to each offense. If the offenses are found to be allied offenses, a judgment of conviction may be entered for only one offense. If the offenses are found not to be allied offenses, a judgment of conviction may be entered for each offense.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 133 Ohio App. 3d 475 - State v. Latson