State v. Grindles’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably State v. Kelekolio (1993), State v. Alston (1994)
1 federal appellate · 65 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 Lisenba v. People of State of California · Brooks v. Tennessee · 96 Wash. 2d 816 - State v. Franco · 339 Pa. Super. 32 - Commonwealth v. Hernandez · State v. Hernandez
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A person commits the offense of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor if: (1) The person operates or assumes actual physical control of the operation of any vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor; or (2) The person operates or assumes actual physical control of the operation of any vehicle with 0.10 per cent or more, by weight of alcohol in the person’s blood.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]n the event the defendant is acquitted under § 291-4(a)(1) and the court allows the State to proceed under § 291-4(a)(2), the defendant will have been twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense in violation of article I, section 10 of the Hawaii Constitution and the eighth [sic] amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Dow · State v. Spearman.“[t]he statute provides that a person commits the offense of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor if the person’s conduct falls into one of two categories: (1) driving while under the influence or (2) driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.10 or more. A blood alcohol content of at least .10 percent is one method of proving the influence of alcohol.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Caleb · State v. Mezurashi
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.