State v. Krohn’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2010
8 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 Garland v. State · Smith v. State · Boyd v. State · Smith 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Intoxicated means under the influence of: (1) alcohol; * ook ok so that there is an impaired condition of thought and action and the loss of normal control of a person's faculties to an extent that endangers a person."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Staley v. State · Slate v. State“A person who operates a vehicle while intoxicated commits a Class A misdemeanor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Slate v. State · State v. Akins“'The endangerment portion of the definition of 'intoxicated' does form an element of the offense and indicates the level of impairment and extent of lost faculties that must be shown to establish intoxication, and to obtain a conviction. However, the endangerment clause does not require that the State prove a person other than the defendant was actually in the path of the defendant's vehicle or in the same area to obtain a conviction. The trial court's interpretation of the statutes and the elements of the offense would require that the police and the State wait until the defendant comes within close proximity of a person before a conviction for operating a vehicle while intoxicated could be obtained. Such an interpretation of the elements, and of the offense of Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated is contrary to the policies and purposes of Indiana's drunk driving laws. Boyd v. State (1988), Ind.App., 519 N.E.2d 182 . ... [Elndangerment can be established by showing evidence that defendant's condition or driving manner could have endangered any person. Thus, proof that the operator's condition renders driving unsafe is sufficient to establish endangerment. Furthermore, endangerment applies to any person including the public, the police, and the driver, regardless of proximity. Therefore, this court holds that the State does not have to prove that a person other than the driver was actually in the area to show endangerment, and the trial court erred in so finding....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lepard 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.