Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 OHIOST3D 577 - State v. Gover

State v. Gover’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably 160 Ohio App. 3d 324 - State v. Hill (2005), Wolfe v. Randle (2003)

32 state decisions

1801995200020102020decided

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 44 Ohio App. 3d 42 - State v. Miller · 10 Ohio St. 2d 183 - State v. Catlino · Steed v. Salisbury

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

  1. “[t]he appropriate avenue for relief is to vacate the prior judgment and re-impose judgment against [Appellant], with the result of reinstating the time under which [Appellant] may file a notice of appeal pursuant to App.R.4(A).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[TJhrough R.C. 2953.21, the General Assembly has provided a means for individuals convicted of crimes to challenge collaterally their convictions after their direct appellate rights have been exhausted. That statute provides that a person convicted of a criminal offense may file a petition for postconviction relief in the trial court that imposed the sentence, challenging the validity of the conviction on state and federal constitutional grounds.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “I. The trial court erred by denying a postconviction petition to correct an error in the pre-appellate process that had the same effect as if the trial court had not appointed appellate counsel. The error violated Mr. Lynch's right to appeal, his right to counsel, and his right to the effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”
    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.