Idol v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Lawrence v. State (1978), Brown v. State (1995)
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 Boyd v. United States · Taylor v. United States · Beeman v. State · Wallace v. State · Dunville 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In Beeman v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 683 , 115 N.E.2d 919 , we lately had occasion to consider the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction of reckless homicide. Applying the rules there stated, it seems apparent that the evidence here falls far short of establishing the offense. There is no evidence that the appellant voluntarily, with knowledge of existing conditions, did an improper act or refrained from doing a proper one under circumstances where his action or failure to act evinced an entire absence of any care or a heedless indifference of the results which might follow. It cannot be found or inferred from the evidence that he made a conscious choice of a course of action which injured another, knowing of the danger to the other, or knowing facts which would disclose the danger to any reasonable man." See also State v. Beckman (1941), 219 Ind. 176 , 37 N.E.2d 531 , and Albert McGann Securities Co., Inc. v. Coen (1943), 114 Ind. App. 60 , 48 N.E.2d 58 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The reasonableness of searches of motor vehicles depends largely upon the facts and circumstances of each par ticular case. This is necessarily so because of the ease and rapidity with which motor vehicles may be moved from place to place, and the consequent impossibility of procuring warrants in all cases in time to search such vehicles.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. MacHlan v. State“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and ef-feets, against unreasonable search or seizure, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cheatham v. State
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.