Skip to main content

Kirsch v. State

Citations

  • 306 S.W.3d 738
  • 2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 11
  • 2010 WL 447437

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “the presence of vodka bottle caps (but no bottles) in the patrol car” was some supporting evidence of intoxication
  • concluding that “appellant’s driving almost 20 m.p.h. over the speed limit prior to the accident” was some supporting evidence indicating intoxication
  • recognizing that evidence raising an inference of intoxication includes erratic driving as well as post-driving behavior such as stumbling, swaying, slurring or mumbling words, and bloodshot eyes
  • recognizing that slurring words, bloodshot eyes, and admissions by the defendant concerning how much he drank would logically raise an inference that the defendant was intoxicated at the time of driving
  • recognizing evidence raising inference of intoxication includes erratic driving, post-driving behavior such as stumbling, swaying, slurring or mumbling words, and bloodshot eyes
  • stating that blood-alcohol content test results are “highly probative” of both impairment and per se intoxication

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran, Keller, Womack, Johnson, Keasler, Hervey, Holcomb, Price, Meyers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

198 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Kirsch v. State

5 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.