State v. Askren’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2020
12 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 Fuenning v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF MARICOPA · Noland v. Wootan · Anderjeski v. City Court of City of Mesa
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t ordinarily would be proper to ask the witness in such a case whether he or she was familiar with the symptoms of intoxication and whether the defendant displayed such symptoms. The witness might be allowed to testify that defendant’s conduct seemed influenced by alcohol.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bedoni“[I]f you find that the defendant’s control of his automobile (or other vehicle) was affected to the slightest degree by intoxicating liquor, the defendant is guilty of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquors.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Grimes
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.