State v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 2019
17 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 State v. Harold · 7 Ariz. App. 210 - State v. Cutshaw · Hasten v. State · People v. Cruz · Weston v. State of Arizona
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not expressly prescribe a culpable mental state that is sufficient for commission of the offense, no culpable mental state is required . . . , and the offense is one of strict liability unless the proscribed conduct necessarily involves a culpable mental state.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gomez · State v. Williams““It certainly does not make sense to allow a defendant to claim that his intentional consumption of alcohol impaired his ability to know that he was intoxicated. It does make sense to require a person who drinks and drives to be responsible for not drinking to the point where he is under the influence of alcohol. He should drive at his peril rather than only at the public’s peril.” 643 P.2d at 692. See also State v. Hill, 31 N.C. App. 733 , 230 S.E.2d 579 (1976).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Williams“The appellant’s * * * argument ignores the well-established classification of crimes as malum in se or malum prohibitum. DWI is the latter, an offense which is wrong because it is prohibited by law. It does not require proof of a culpable mental state. See A.R.S. § 13-202(B); State v. Cutshaw, 7 Ariz.App. 210 , 437 P.2d 962 (1968).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Williams
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.