Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 498 NE2D 1195 - Pavey v. State

Pavey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
June 2001
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2001

2 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

70198619902000decided

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 Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Rasmussen · Davis v. State · Terry v. State · Williams v. State · Cyrus 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A defendant in Indiana can offer a defense of voluntary intoxication to any crime. The potential of this defense should not be confused with the reality of the situation. It is difficult to envision a finding of not guilty by reason of intoxication when the acts committed require a significant degree of physical or intellectual skills. As a general proposition, a defendant should not be relieved of responsibility when he was able to devise a plan, operate equipment, instruct the behavior of others or carry out acts requiring physical skill. In the case at bar, evidence was produced to show that appellant had been drinking. However, evidence was also introduced to show he drove a car, gave directions to other people and made decisions on a course of action for himself. The trial court did not err in refusing to give the instruction as no reasonable doubt existed that the appellant had the intent to commit the act for which he was charged.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “"Any factor which serves as a denial of the existence of mens rea must be considered by a trier of fact before a guilty finding is entered. Historically, facts such as age, mental condition, mistake or intoxication have been offered to negate the capacity to formulate intent. The attempt by the legislature to remove the factor of voluntary intoxication, except in limited situations, goes against this firmly ingrained principle. We thus hold Ind.Code § 35-41-3-5(b) is void and without effect."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “only to the extent that it negates an element of an offense referred to by the phrase 'with intent to' or 'with an intention to.”
    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.