Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 658 NE2D 68 - Freeman v. State

Freeman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
December 2014
most recently cited

47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably State v. Anaya (1996), Smith v. State (1996)

47 state decisions

230199520002010decided

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 Park 100 Development Co. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue · State v. Gilbert · Schrenker v. Clifford · Sanders v. State · Superior Construction Co. v. Carr

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

  1. “"The legislature is presumed to have existing statutes in mind when it adopts new law. When the statutes cannot be harmonized, however, and the legislature dealt with a subject in a detailed manner in one statute and in a general manner in the other, the detailed statute will supersede the general one. The two statutes at issue are difficult to harmonize. Both constitute a progressive scheme of justice which attaches at the defendant's first O.W.I. conviction. Construing these statutes somehow to operate consecutively would eliminate each statutes' language pertaining to its starting point-the first conviction.... We therefore turn to the question of which enhancement the legislature intended courts to employ for O.W.I. repeaters."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[Where two statutes address the same subject, they are in pari materia, and we strive to harmonize them where possible.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “repeated violators of [LC. § 9-30-5] that fall within the short, statutorily defined periods designated in Seetion 9-12-1-4 [recodified at L.C. § 9-80-10-4] subject a defendant to sentence enhancement as a habitual violator.'”
    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.