State v. Otte’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently November 2022
19 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 Strickland v. Washington · State v. Bradley · State v. Otte · State v. Pless · State ex rel. Jackson v. Dallman
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“State ex rel. Larkins v. Baker (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 658 , 653 N.E.2d 701 , presented a similar issue. There, the petitioner's signed jury waiver (like Otte's) was physically located in the case file but had not been file-stamped. We held that, despite Dallman's requirement of strict compliance with R.C. 2945.05 , the trial court's failure to file-stamp the waiver was not a jurisdictional defect. Id. at 661 , 653 N.E. 2d at 703 . When we later decided Pless , we distinguished Larkins in part because "the record before us contains no evidence that appellant's signed jury waiver form was ever included in the trial court's case file.' Pless , 74 Ohio St. 3d at 339 , 658 N.E.2d at 770 . {¶ 36} "Thus, had Otte's appellate counsel raised the Pless issue, there is no reasonable probability that the result would have been different; Otte would have lost anyway. . . . (Footnotes omitted). 94 Ohio St.3d at 169 , 2002-Ohio-343 , 761 N.E.2d at 36 . {¶ 37} In the case at bar, State's Exhibit 16 shows a certification, dated March 20, 2007, that states: {¶ 38} "I hereby certify this to be a true copy of TPO taken from the Zanesville Municipal Court records, Zanesville, Ohio.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nowhere does Otte set forth any factual basis for his claim that the affidavit was not filed. He does attach a photocopy of a certified copy of the signed jury waiver as an exhibit to his brief. But nothing on the face of that exhibit indicates that the signed waiver was not filed in the trial court. At most, it can be said that the waiver appears to lack a contemporaneous file stamp. Moreover, the exhibit shows a certification, dated September 6, 1996, that states: *Page 10 {¶ 34} `I, Gerald E. Fuerst, clerk of the court of common pleas within and for said [Cuyahoga] county, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is truly taken and copied from the original CR279973 now on file in my office.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.