Powell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 1997
21 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 Tait v. State · Stock v. State · Rhoades v. State · Marks v. State · Fisher 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(b) Driving While under the Influence of Intoxicating Liquor or Narcotic Drugs. Any person who drives a vehicle while such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of narcotic or other habit-forming drugs shall be guilty of a criminal offense. (1) Any person who while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic or other habit-forming drugs drives a vehicle and when so driving causes the death of another person, is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, shall be imprisoned for an indeterminate period of not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years; or shall be imprisoned for an indeterminate period of not less than one (1) year nor more than two (2) years to which shall be aded a fine of not less than two hundred fifty ($250) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000). . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Crooks v. State““It has been established in this state that the material allegations incident to the offense charged must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt; . . . Allegations not essential to such purpose, which can be entirely omitted without affecting the sufficiency of the charge against the defendant, are considered as mere surplusage and may be disregarded.” Powell v. State, supra, 250 Ind. at 667 , 237 N. E. 2d at 97 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Summerlin v. State““It is to be noted that the attorney for the appellant made no objection to the instruction given by the court concerning the appropriate verdict. Nor did the appellant, through his attorney, make any objection to the sentence rendered by the court; nor was there any motion made to correct the verdict before the jury was dismissed.” 250 Ind. at 669 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hollars 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.