Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 233 Ind. 294 - Kelley v. State

Kelley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
April 1991
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently April 1991 · most notably Kidwell v. State (1967), Spranger v. State (1986)

33 state decisions

10019541960197019801990decided

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 Caudill v. State · Romary v. State · Manners v. State · Woodsmall v. State · Gingerich v. State

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

  1. “"It is a fundamental rule in the construction of statutes that penal statutes must be construed strictly, or, as is otherwise stated, strictly construed against the state. The rule of strict construction means that such statutes will not be enlarged by implication or intendment beyond the fair meaning of the language used, and will not be held to include offenses and persons other than those which are clearly described and provided for although the court may think the legislature should have made them more comprehensive." Kelly v. State (1954), 233 Ind. 294, 298 , 119 N.E.2d 322, 324 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(a) The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person shall immediately stop such vehicle at the scene of such accident or as close thereto as possible, and shall then forthwith return to and in every event shall remain at the scene of the accident until he has fulfilled the requirements of section 41 [§47-1912]. Every such stop shall be made without obstructing traffic more than is necessary. “(a) Any person failing to stop or to comply with said requirements under such circumstances shall upon conviction be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten [10] .days nor more than one [1] year or by fine of not less than ten dollars [$10.00] nor more than five thousand dollars [$5,000], or by both such fine and imprisonment.” §47-1910, Burns’ 1952 Replacement, supra, “The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person or damage to any vehicle which is driven or attended by any person shall give his name, address, and the registration number of the vehicle he is driving and shall upon request exhibit his driving license to the person struck or to the driver or occupant of, or person attending any vehicle collided with, and shall render to any person injured in such, accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying or the making of arrangements for the carrying of such person to a physician, surgeon, or hospital for medical or surgical treatment, if it is apparent that such treatmen”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““The undersigned affiant being first duly sworn upon his oath says that at the County of Cass in the State of Indiana on or about the 25th day of April, 1953, Peter L. Kimener did then and there unlawfully while the driver of a motor vehicle, to-wit: a 1952 Plymouth automobile, become involved in an accident, to-wit: the collision of two automobiles on U. S. Road 24, approximately 6% miles-east of the City of Logansport, in Cass County, Indiana, resulting in injury to Otto Richwine, Aria Richwine, Paul Mosier and Lavon Mosier, and fail to remain at the scene of the said accident until he had given his name, address and registration number of the vehicle he was driving and likewise fail to render to the said persons injured in such accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying of or making of arrangements for the carrying of such persons to a physician, surgeon or hospital for medical or surgical treatment when it was apparent that such treatment was necessary, contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Indiana.””
    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.