People v. Crane

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that if the statutory definitions of the crime in the other jurisdiction contain all of the necessary elements, then the inquiry ends
• concluding impairment to slightest degree less stringent standard than impairment to appreciable degree
• although California law does not require proof of any specific degree of intoxication, “Weathington makes clear that [§ ] 23152 requires impairment ‘to an appreciable degree’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Schmoll
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2007-11-07· cited 20×
• State v. Lewis
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 2008-02-06· cited 16×
• State of Arizona v. Scott Alan Colvin
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2013-01-31· cited 9×
• People v. Self
  California Court of Appeal· 2012-04-04· cited 8×
• Isaac v. Department of Motor Vehicles
  California Court of Appeal· 2007-09-26· cited 5×
• People v. Morgan
  California Court of Appeal· 2023-01-20

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Guerrero
  California Supreme Court· 1988-02-11· cited 347×
• Estate of McDill
  California Supreme Court· 1975-07-24· cited 309×
• People v. Woodell
  California Supreme Court· 1998-02-11· cited 277×
• People v. Myers
  California Supreme Court· 1993-09-30· cited 85×
• People v. Weathington
  California Court of Appeal· 1991-06-11· cited 29×
• Komas v. Future Systems, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 1977-07-19· cited 28×
• McDonald v. Department of Motor Vehicles
  California Court of Appeal· 2000-01-14· cited 13×
• People v. Encinas
  California Court of Appeal· 1998-03-23· cited 2×