Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 826 N.E.2d 640 - Ham v. State

Ham v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
January 2014
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Dill v. State · Ludy v. State · Fehlman v. State · Carter v. State · Schmidt 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “emphasize one particular evidentiary fact, witness, or phase of the case.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant's refusal to submit to a chemical test may be considered as evidence of intoxication.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Whether a defendant's refusal to submit to a chemical test is evidence of intoxication or merely that the defendant refused to take the test is for the lawyers to argue and the jury to decide. An instruction from the bench one way or the other misleads the jury by unnecessarily emphasizing one evidentiary fact.”
    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.