State v. Kruger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “). Here, intent appears to be the focus of the defense. And the State does not argue otherwise. Its argument is that Mr. Kruger needed an expert to support the voluntary intoxication defense. Resp't's Br. at 9. And so we do not see how the failure to request this instruction would fit strategically or tactically in this case. Every witness testified to Mr. Kruger's level of intoxication. No one downplayed or hid Mr. Kruger's level of intoxication. And the jury expressed some confusion over the question of intent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kruger

2. “the officer. Officer Tracy Meidl arrived. Both officers attempted to subdue Mr. Kruger. Pepper spray had little effect on Mr. Kruger. This is usually the case when one is highly intoxicated. Report of Proceedings (RP) at 46-47. The officers eventually subdued and handcuffed Mr. Kruger. At the jail, Mr. Kruger began vomiting. Officer Pence took Mr. Kruger to the hospital”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kruger

3. “Id. So where the court gives a voluntary intoxication instruction, the defendant can argue diminished capacity without an expert. Id. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE TO FAIL TO ASK FOR INSTRUCTION The next question is whether the failure to request the instruction was ineffective assistance. A defendant has the right to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kruger