92 Ohio App. 3d 467 - State v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[a]ny motion, however labeled, which, if granted, restricts the state in the presentation of certain evidence and, thereby, renders the state's proof with respect to the pending charge so weak in its entirety that any reasonable possibility of effective prosecution has been destroyed, is, in effect, a motion to suppress. The granting of such a motion is a final order and may be appealed[.]" State v. Davidson (1985), 17 Ohio St.3d 132 , syllabus; Crim.R. 12(K).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Redfearn, 06ca009040 (8-13-2007)

2. “The granting of Hatter's pretrial motion excluding the witnesses' testimony in its entirety severely weakened the state's case so that any reasonable probability of effective prosecution was destroyed. Therefore the trial court was correct in recasting the motion as one requesting the suppression of evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Thyot

3. “the disposition of which is interlocutory[,] * * * does not ordinarily give rise to immediate appellate review.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Redfearn, 06ca009040 (8-13-2007)