Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Alexander Graham, 222 N.W. 909.

40 citing documents.

Melissa Ann Lorsung v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. 2026
Melissa Ann Lorsung v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. 2026
where we acknowledged that “ ‘[a]lthough he can walk straight, although he may attend to his business and may not give any outward and visible signs to the casual observer that he is drunk,’ a person may still be under the influence.” 14 satisfactory HGN tes
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
When used in reference to the driver of a vehicle on the public highways, it appears to have a well-understood meaning.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Franklin v. Clemett 382 P.3d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Horning 535 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 1995
State v. Horning 535 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 1995
176 Minn. 164, 168 , 222 N.W.
State v. Horning 511 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Horning 511 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
at 292-93 (quoting State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164, 168 , 222 N.W.
State v. Shepard 473 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Shepard 473 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
“Under the influence” means Shepard did not “possess that clearness of intellect and control of [herself] that [s]he otherwise would have.” State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164, 169 , 222 N.W.
State v. Teske 390 N.W.2d 388 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Teske 390 N.W.2d 388 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Driving While Under the Influence To prove Teske was under the influence, the state had to show he did not “possess that clearness of intellect and control of himself that he otherwise would have * *.” State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164, 169 , 222 N.W.
State, City of Eagan v. Elmourabit 373 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1985
State, City of Eagan v. Elmourabit 373 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1985
Long ago, in State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164, 168 , 222 N.W.
State v. Decker 371 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Decker 371 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , 222 N.W.
State v. Duemke 352 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Duemke 352 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164, 168, 169 , 222 N.W.
State v. Hicks 222 N.W.2d 345 Minn. 1974
State v. Hicks 222 N.W.2d 345 Minn. 1974
2 These cases include State v. Dax, 290 Minn. 546 , Trail v. Village of Elk River, 286 Minn. 380 , State v. Duren, 266 Minn. 335 , State v. Peterson, 266 Minn. 77 , State v. Simonsen, 252 Minn. 315 , State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , Clarke v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co. 92 Minn. 418 , McKillop v. Duluth St.
State v. Ruffin 158 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1968
State v. Ruffin 158 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1968
State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , .
State v. Simonsen 89 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1958
State v. Simonsen 89 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1958
The state cites State v. Wilson, 244 Minn. 382 , 69 N. W. (2d) 905 ; State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , ; and McKillop v. Duluth St.
Strand v. Village of Watson 72 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1955
Strand v. Village of Watson 72 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1955
5 State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , ; 22 Wd.
State v. Brady 70 N.W.2d 449 Minn. 1955
State v. Brady 70 N.W.2d 449 Minn. 1955
In State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , , we held that the term “under the influence of intoxicating liquor” is so well understood as to require no further definition in a court’s charge relative thereto.
State v. Gulbrandsen 57 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1953
State v. Gulbrandsen 57 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1953
479 (shown on examination of briefs); State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , 222 N.W.
Hahn v. City of Ortonville 57 N.W.2d 254 Minn. 1953
Hahn v. City of Ortonville 57 N.W.2d 254 Minn. 1953
4 Cf. Sylvester v. Northwestern Hospital, 236 Minn. 384 , 53 N. W. (2d) 17 ; State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , .
State v. Carroll 31 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 1948
State v. Carroll 31 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 1948
See, State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , ; Martinka v. Hoffmann, 214 Minn. 346 , 9 N. W. (2d) 13 .
State v. Rediker 8 N.W.2d 527 Minn. 1943
State v. Rediker 8 N.W.2d 527 Minn. 1943
State v. Plym, 43 Minn. 385 , ; State v. Kerr, 162 Minn. 309 , ; State v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , ; State v. Brown, 209 Minn. 478 , .
State v. Brown 296 N.W. 582 Minn. 1941
State v. Brown 296 N.W. 582 Minn. 1941
State *482 v. Graham, 176 Minn. 164 , ; State v. Kerr, 162 Minn. 309 , ; State v. Findling, 123 Minn. 413 , , 49 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Weston v. State of Arizona 65 P.2d 652 Ariz. 1937