73 Ohio App. 182 - State v. Cocco’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““3. It is prejudicially erroneous for the prosecutor in a criminal case to comment upon a notice that evidence would be offered to prove an alibi under Section 13444-20, General Code, when such notice has not been filed with the papers and had not been offered in evidence, and no evidence is proffered of such alibi. “4. A statement in argument to the jury by the prosecuting attorney that the defendant on trial has used various aliases, where there is no evidence that he had done so, is preju-dicially erroneous.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 41 Ohio App. 3d 91 - State v. Daugherty

2. ““Under no conceivable theory should this document have been presented to the jury. It could not do otherwise than prejudice the jury, when there had been no evidence of an alibi. And the act of defendant’s counsel in discussing the matter of alibi before the prospective jurors and the impaneled jury did but aggravate the prejudice. The court should on its own motion have protected the defendant from this reading of the notice and the failure so to protect him was erroneous and prejudicial.” (Emphasis added.) 4”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. O'CONNOR v. State