Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 787 SW2D 388 - Solis v. State

Solis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Gray v. State (2004), State v. Carter (1991)

25 state decisions

160199020002010decided

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 Thomas v. State · American Plant Food Corporation v. State · Adams v. State · Ferguson v. State · Phillips 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Because the methods of proving intoxication by alcohol are set out statutorily and do not depend on any conduct committed by a defendant, other than introduction of alcohol into the body — which was already alleged — the State need not specify in the charging instrument whether it will use loss of faculties or alcohol content to prove the offense.” 787 S.W.2d at 391 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, or a combination of two or more of those substances into the body; or “(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “the elements of the offense are that: (1) a person (2) drives or operates (3) a mo tor vehicle (4) in a public place (5) while intoxicated. In addition, there are four manners in which a defendant’s conduct may lead to intoxication: (1) ingestion of alcohol, (2) ingestion of a controlled substance, (3) ingestion of a drug (4) ingestion of some combination of alcohol, controlled substances, and/or drugs. If the manner or means of intoxication is by a controlled substance, drug, or a combination of substances, the State may prove intoxication in only one way — that the defendant did not have “the normal use of mental or physical faculties”.... If the State elects to prove that intoxication was due to introduction of alcohol into the body, it may prove intoxication in one of two ways, loss of faculties and alcohol content [in the blood, breath, or urine] of 0.10 or more.”
    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.