164 Ind. App. 693 - Bowlin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Here the facts known to and observed by the officer were sufficient for a prudent man to believe that Bowlin had been driving under the influence. Whether the evidence obtainable would ultimately support a conviction was not the issue. There was probable cause."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hiegel v. State · 325 So. 2d 588 - City of Baton Rouge v. Mitchell

2. “when a certification of refusal to submit to a chemical test is submitted to the court, the court shall hold a separate hearing to determine (a) whether the law enforcement officer had probable cause to believe that the accused had committed the offense; (b) whether the law enforcement officer offered the opportunity to the accused to submit to a chemical test before placing the accused under arrest; and (c) whether the accused in fact refused to submit to a chemical test.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 177 Ind. App. 628 - Jaremczuk v. State

3. ““Finally, it is urged that the failure to deliver Bowlin’s license to the court along with the certification of his refusal to take the test precludes the court from acting. The statute is directory in this regard, and the inability of an arresting officer to secure the defendant’s driver’s license does not preclude proceeding under the act.” Bowlin v. State, supra, 164 Ind.App. 693, at 695 , 330 N.E.2d 353, at 356 .”

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