State v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently April 1987 · most notably Lee v. State (1961), State v. Trujillo (1973)
35 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. Ragland · State v. Linville · State v. Radke · Campbell v. Brown · State v. Dowling
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . The offense of unlawfully driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor is comprised of several elements, each of which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt by the State. The State must prove at the time in question (1) the defendant was operating the motor vehicle in question; (2) that the instrumentality which the defendant was operating was a motor vehicle within the contemplation of such term in the statute; (3) that the defendant was operating such vehicle on a public highway; and (4) that he was under the influence of intoxicating liquor. . . .” (p. 711.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Gregory · State v. Budden““. . . or in any prosecution for a violation of city ordinance relating to the driving of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, evidence of the amount of alcohol in the defendant’s blood at the time alleged, as shown by chemical analysis of the defendant’s blood, urine, breath or other bodily substance may be admitted, and shall give rise to the following presumptions: “(b) If there was at that time 0.15 percent or more by weight of alcohol in the defendant’s blood it shall be presumed that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Therefore, even if it can be said that it was error to admit the results of the blood test in evidence, it was merely cumulative and cannot be said to have affected the substantial rights of the accused. (G. S. 1949, 62-1718; State v. Radke, 168 Kan. 334 , 212 P. 2d 296 ; and State v. Linville, 150 Kan. 617 , 95 P. 2d 332 .)” (p. 712.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Wood
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.