Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 78 Ohio App. 3d 847 - State v. Stevens

78 Ohio App. 3d 847 - State v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2016

21 state decisions

100199220002010decided

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 State v. Jenks · State v. Eskridge · 34 Ohio App. 3d 300 - State v. Garfield · 31 Ohio App. 3d 68 - City of Maple Heights v. Dickard · 5 Ohio App. 3d 109 - City of Miamisburg v. Smith

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

  1. “(A) In determining whether to impose imprisonment or a fine, or both, for a misdemeanor, and in determining the term of imprisonment and the amount and method of payment of a fine for a misdemeanor, the court shall consider the risk that the offender will commit another offense and the need for protecting the public from the risk; the nature and circumstances of the offense; the history, character, and condition of the offender and the offender's need for correctional or rehabilitative treatment * * * and the ability and resources of the offender and the nature of the burden that payment of a fine will impose on the offender. * * * {¶ 24} "(F) The court shall not impose a fine or fines that, in the aggregate and to the extent not suspended by the court, exceed the amount that the offender is or will be able to pay by the method and within the time allowed without undue hardship to the offender or the offender's dependents, or will prevent the offender from making restitution or reparation to the victim or the offender's offense.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a mandatory duty to consider the factors set forth in the statute and the failure to do so amounts to an abuse of the court's discretion.”
    2 later decisions 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.