Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 90 OHIOST3D 502 - State v. Sullivan

State v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably State v. Muncie (2001), State v. Williams (2010)

36 state decisions

190200120102020decided

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 Jackson v. Indiana · Fortner v. Thomas · United States v. Shawar · Wendell v. AmeriTrust Co. · United States v. Donofrio

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

  1. “When a court strikes down a statute as unconstitutional, and the offending statute replaced an existing law that had been repealed in the same bill that enacted the offending statute, the repeal is also invalid unless it clearly appears that the General Assembly meant the repeal to have effect even if the offending statute had never been passed.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “{¶ 39} “[A] person charged by a State with a criminal offense who is committed solely on account of his incapacity to proceed to trial cannot be held more than the reasonable period of time necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that he will attain that capacity in the foreseeable future.” Jackson, 406 U.S. at 738 , 92 S.Ct. 1845 , 32 L.Ed.2d 435 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[i]f any item of law *** contained in this act *** is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other items of law or applications of items of law that can be given effect without the invalid item of law or application. To this end *** sections of law contained in this act are composed, and their applications, are independent and severable.”
    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.