70 Ohio App. 3d 765 - State v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2011
20 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 Strickland v. Washington · State v. Lytle · State v. Smith · State v. Hester · State v. Cooperrider
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The defendant shall be present at the arraignment and every stage of the trial, including the impaneling of the jury, the return of the verdict, and the imposition of sentence * * *.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Moreover, in order to modify a sentence pronounced in open court, it is necessary for the modification to be formalized in a journal entry, even though the original sentence was not journalized. State v. Sweeney (Apr. 1, 1982), Cuyahoga App. No. 43810, unreported; State v. Butler (1974), 44 Ohio App.2d 177 , 337 N.E.2d 633 .”
1 later decision 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.