Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 918 NE2D 695 - Hoeppner v. State

Hoeppner v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
3
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Anglemyer v. State · Anglemyer v. State · Cox v. State · Marcum v. State · Carswell 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[W]e find that the portion of the probation condition at issue herein providing that results of a polygraph examination are admissible in future court proceedings is impermissible and direct the trial court to strike this part of the condition. It is permissible, however, to require that Hoeppner submit to these examinations, the results of which may be used in future probation revocation proceedings. We acknowledge Hoeppner's concern that the clause seems to deprive him of due process rights by stating that positive results will constitute a probation violation, seemingly removing the State's obligation to prove that a violation has, in fact, occurred. See Ind.Code § 35-38-2-3(e) (providing that the State must prove a probation violation by a preponderance of the evidence).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “You shall submit to a lie detection test and/or alcohol and drug detection test equipment, as requested by your probation officer, to determine personal drug and/or alcohol use and your knowledge of drug trafficking.... Positive results in a lie detection test may be used against you in a probation revocation proceeding and may constitute a violation of your probation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A trial court may abuse its discretion by entering a sentencing statement that includes reasons for imposing a sentence not supported by the record, omits reasons elearly supported by the record, or includes reasons that are improper as a matter of law.”
    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.