Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 OHIOST3D 354 - State v. Braden

State v. Braden’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

199
cited by 199 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

193 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 199 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2025 · most notably State v. Perry (2004), State v. Trimble (2009)

193 state decisions

990200320102020decided

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 · United States v. Olano · State v. Thompkins · 20 Ohio App. 3d 172 - State v. Martin · State v. Bradley

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

  1. “The court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered. The discretionary power to grant a new trial should be exercised only in the exceptional case in which the evidence weighs heavily against the conviction.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “whether evidence of reasonably sufficient provocation occasioned by the victim has been presented to warrant such an instruction.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Where evidence adduced at trial reveals the presence of sufficient time and opportunity for the planning of an act of homicide to constitute prior calculation, and the circumstances surrounding the homicide show a scheme designed to implement the calculated decision to kill, a finding by the trier of fact of prior calculation and design is justified.”
    3 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.