81 Ohio App. 3d 644 - State v. Ospina’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2024
20 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Beck v. State of Ohio · Doyle v. Ohio · Roviaro v. United States · State v. Dehass
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the United States Supreme Court held that testimony of a defendant's post-arrest silence, which also occurs subsequent to No. 18AP-523 15 the administration of Miranda warnings, violates the defendant's privilege against selfincrimination incorporated into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. A.W.M.“[t]he result would be different if it were proved that [the defendant] had been aware of the offer to sell the requisite amount even if the amount actually delivered was less.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Ferguson“it is clear that the actual administration of Miranda warnings, rather than the arrest and custodial interrogation, triggers the constitutional protection of Doyle.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.