Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 8 Ohio App. 3d 144 - State v. Breaston

8 Ohio App. 3d 144 - State v. Breaston’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2018

5 state decisions

201982199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. “the common usage of the term `theft' under R.C. 2913.02 requires an individual to knowingly exert or obtain control over the property of another with the purpose to deprive the owner. Pursuant to R.C. 2913.01 (C)(3), `deprive' means to `accept, use, or appropriate money, property, or services, with purpose not to give proper consideration in return for the money, property, or services, and without reasonable justification or excuse for not giving proper consideration.' As the definition indicates, intent to permanently *Page 8 deprive the owner of the property is no longer a necessary element of a theft offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) Without the consent of the owner or person authorized to give consent;”
    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.