91 Ohio App. 3d 39 - State v. Prokos’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably State v. Baston (1999), Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Tomchik (1999)
43 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 State v. Adams · State v. Sage · Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc. · State v. DeMarco · State v. Combs
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The principle underlying Evid.R. 404(B) is that evidence of other acts is simply so prejudicial that to allow it outweighs its value as relevant evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The right to question witnesses pursuant to Evid. R. 614(B) rests within the sound discretion of the trial court.”
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.