Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 S.W.3d 637 - State v. Mitchell

State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
November 2014
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Knifong · State v. Wiles · State v. Cross · Mehler v. Mehler

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

  1. “Because Mr. Mitchell’s transmission was in “drive” and not “park,” as was the driver’s transmission in Wiles , the circumstances here are even more compelling than those deemed sufficient to constitute operating in Wiles . Clearly, as in Wiles , Mr. Mitchell was engaging the machinery of his vehicle and was in a position to manipulate its movement, since the engine was running, the vehicle was in gear to drive, and Mr. Mitchell’s pressing the brake pedal was the only reason his truck was not moving. Therefore, this court finds that there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could conclude that Mr. Mitchell was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of operating his vehicle while in an intoxicated condition.”
    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.