16 Ohio App. 3d 59 - State v. Woerner’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2024
7 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 Kolender v. Lawson · State v. Dorso · Greaves v. State · City of Columbus v. New
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hile it true that most people will be unaware of the exact point in their alcohol consumption when the test results will reach the statutory standard, that alone does not render [the per se alcohol statute] unconstitutional for vagueness. [The statute] warns anyone contemplating driving an automobile while drinking alcoholic beverages that there is a certain point at which he will have consumed sufficient alcoholic beverages to make illegal his operation of a motor vehicle.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Topolosky““* * * Regardless of how defendant appears, acts, or drives, he is guilty of the offense if he drives a motor vehicle exceeding the prescribed concentration of alcohol in his breath.””
1 later decision 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.