State v. Beckman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “" The offense of reckless driving, as defined in this section, may be based, depending upon the circumstances, on the following enumerated acts and also on other acts which are not here enumerated but are not excluded and may be within the definition of the offense: (1) driving at such an unreasonably high rate of speed, or at such an unreasonably low rate of speed, under the circumstances, as to endanger the safety or the property of others, or as to block the proper flow of traffic; (2) passing or attempting to pass another vehicle from the rear while on a slope or on a curve where vision ahead is obstructed for a distance of less than five hundred [ 500 ] feet ahead; (3) driving in and out of a line of traffic, except as permitted elsewhere in the laws of this state; (4) speeding up or refusing to give half of the roadway to a driver overtaking and desiring to pass; (5) failing to dim bright or blinding lights when meeting another vehicle or pedestrian; (6) driving recklessly against another person or against the car or other property of another; or driving in any other specified manner in which the driver is heedless of probable injury to the safety, the property or the rights of others." (Emphasis added.)”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Seibert v. State · Kain v. State

2. “"Any person who drives a vehicle with reckless disregard for the safety of others and thereby causes the death of another person...." (Our italics.)”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Seibert v. State · State of Oregon v. Wojahn

3. ““ ‘An indictment must state the facts and circumstances which constitute the offense charged with certainty and precision, and every material circumstance in regard to time and place, must be averred with that degree of certainty which is sufficient, to exclude every other intendment.’ Alderson v. State (1924), 196 Ind. 22, 28, 29 , 145 N. E. 572, 574 . “In State v. Beckman (1941), 219 Ind. 176, 185 , 37 N. E. 2d 531 , this court, in holding an affidavit charging reckless homicide was properly quashed, said: ‘Involuntary manslaughter does not belong to that class of crimes that may be charged in the language of the statute. When the affidavit or indictment is based upon the commission of an act which is unlawful because it is negligent, the allegations must allege facts by which it is made to appear that the act was done wantonly or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, and it must further appear that such act was the proximate cause of the death. Potter v. State (1904), 162 Ind. 213 , 70 N. E. 129 , 64 L. R. A. 942, 102 Am. St. Rep. 198 , 1 Ann. Cas. 32, it was held to be necessary to a charge of manslaughter that the death of the decedent be made to appear the natural or necessary result of the unlawful act relied upon and that it was insufficient to charge that the killing occurred “while” the defendant was doing the unlawful act.....’ In Kimmel v. State (1926), 198 Ind. 444, 451 , 154 N. E. 16 , it was held that an affidavit for involuntary manslaughter must c”

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