Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Shepard, 481 N.W.2d 560.

31 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
S tate of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Joseph Harrison Baynes, Appellant. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
This element is satisfied when “the state shows that the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
Charles Wayne Weyhrauch, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In State v. Shepard , the supreme court recognized that, “[p]resumably, if the drinking had occurred after the accident, the driver would have said so since that fact would have helped her.” d 560, 563 (Minn. 1992) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(noting in a DWI case that “if the drinking had occurred after the accident, [the driver] would have said so since that fact obviously would have helped”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
To prove a driving- under-the-influence charge, the state must show that the driver drank enough alcohol so that “the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.” State v. Shepard
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The state may obtain a conviction of DWI even if the driver’s alcohol concentration was below the legal limit “provided the state shows that the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Instead, the state must prove that Kowalzyk “had drunk enough alcohol so that [his] ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
1 (2016) (providing that a person commits DWI if “the person is under the influence of alcohol” or if “the person’s alcohol concentration at the time, or as measured within two hours of the time, of driving, operating, or being in physical control of [a] motor vehicle is 0.08 or more”); (“The state may obtain a [DWI] conviction even if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration was less than [the legal limit] provided the state shows that the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ab
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See, -64 (Minn. 1992); Larson, d at 676 -77.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
1(1) (2014), which criminalizes driving a motor vehicle while “under the influence of alcohol.” “Under the influence” means that the dr iver drank enough alcohol so th at his “ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
Justin Robert Price, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Impairment must be shown “in some way or to some degree,” 1 DWI is a misdemeanor, if no aggravating factors are present.
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
[his] ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
State of Minnesota v. Paula Jean Yackel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Paula Jean Yackel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Asa James Kingsbury Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Asa James Kingsbury Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Laverne DeBerry Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Laverne DeBerry Minn. Ct. App. 2015
4 “Under the influence” means that “the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
Daniel Peter Frisch v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Daniel Peter Frisch v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Ards 816 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Ards 816 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
The state must show that “the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”
State v. MOHOMOUD 788 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. MOHOMOUD 788 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
It was not necessary for the state to prove that Mohomoud was drunk; rather the state had to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the alcohol impaired Moho-moud’s ability to drive “in some way or to some degree.”
Reeves v. Commissioner of Public Safety 751 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Reeves v. Commissioner of Public Safety 751 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
(“The state may obtain a[DWI] conviction even if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration was less than [the legal limit] provided the state shows that the driver had drunk enough alcohol so that the driver’s ability or capacity to drive was impaired in some way or to some degree.”).
State v. Horning 535 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 1995
State v. Bashaw 531 N.W.2d 203 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Bashaw 531 N.W.2d 203 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(defendant is always free to present evidence bearing on how test result relates to time of driving).