76 Ohio App. 3d 15 - State v. Meister’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 2022
22 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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Whalen v. United States · United States v. DiFrancesco · Alabama v. Smith · State v. Stumpf
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Both historically and as a matter of policy, a trial court may resentence a defendant who has not begun to serve the sentence to a more severe sentence without violating the multiple-sentences protections of the Double Jeopardy Clause. The reason is that, before its execution, a sentence lacks the constitutional finality of a verdict of acquittal. United States v. DiFrancesco (1980), 449 U.S. 117 , 101 S.Ct. 426 , 66 L.Ed.2d 328 ; State v. Vaughn (1983), 10 Ohio App.3d 314 , 10 OBR 520, 462 N.E.2d 444 . Cf. Whalen v. United States (1980), 445 U.S. 684, 703 , 100 S.Ct. 1432, 1443 , 63 L.Ed.2d 715, 731 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Evans
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.