92 Ohio App. 29 - State v. Ross’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

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

1. ““* * * jurors ought to be told in all cases that every man is to be presumed to be sane, and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, until the contrary be proved to their satisfaction; and that to establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong. The mode of putting the latter part of the question to the jury * * * has generally been, whether the accused at the time of doing the act knew the difference between right and wrong * * * in respect to the very act with, which he is charged. * * *””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 18 Ohio St. 2d 13 - State v. Staten

2. ““It is a substantial right of the defendant to a fair trial. This right is not the abstract question of guilt or innocence. A guilty man is entitled to a trial, free from prejudicial error. * # *””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 30 Ohio App. 2d 232 - State v. Livingston