8 Ohio App. 3d 205 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably State v. Taylor (1997), State v. Campbell (2000)
6 federal appellate · 37 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 Mullaney v. Wilbur · Engle v. Isaac · Cupp v. Naughten · Patterson v. New York · State v. Bridgeman
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rather, defendant went to the bar “to have a good time” but was refused admittance. After defendant demanded entrance, verbal threats grew into a physical confrontation between defendant and the three persons within the bar. Defendant did not reach for his gun in his pocket until he was outnumbered and getting the worse of their treatment. No evidence was presented which demonstrated a previous strained relationship between defendant and the doorman or the bar owner. The mere fact that defendant was carrying a gun on this occasion but was not carrying a gun on some earlier visit to a different bar is not sufficient to demonstrate a prior calculation and design to kill someone at this bar. The shooting occurred during an almost “instantaneous eruption of events.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'[p]rior calculation and design' sets up a *** more demanding standard than the old first degree standard of 'deliberate and premeditated malice'. 'Prior calculation and design' require some kind of studied analysis ***. Momentary premeditation is no longer sufficient.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Miller“(1) A defense expressly designated as affirmative; [or] (2) A defense involving an excuse or justification peculiarly within the knowledge of the accused, on which he can fairly be required to adduce supporting evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. White v. Arn
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.