People v. Garner

How courts have described this case

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

• “The statute does not require evidence that the intoxication affected the driver’s operation in a manner that results in a collision. The clear intent of the legislature is to punish and thereby to 13R.I. Gen. Laws § 31-27-2.2(a) (1982

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Barry
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2014-10-09· cited 201×
• State of Iowa v. Jonathan Q. Adams
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 2012-01-20· cited 84×
• People v. Smoots
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2013-11-21· cited 57×
• Commonwealth v. Samuels
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-08-28· cited 32×
• Miller v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1999-02-22· cited 27×
• State v. Hubbard
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1999-12-16· cited 25×
• People v. Acosta
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1993-04-22· cited 23×
• Foster ex rel. Foster v. Phillips
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1999-09-30· cited 23×
• People v. Lucero
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1999-05-13· cited 17×
• People v. Collins
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2001-08-16· cited 13×
• People v. Grassi
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2008-05-01· cited 13×
• People v. Stewart
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2001-06-25· cited 7×
• The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff–Appellee,v.Richard Alfred STROCK, Defendant–Appellant.
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2010-08-19