State v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
96 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Kimmelman v. Henkels & McCoy, Inc. (1987), O'CONNELL v. State (2002)
96 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on State v. Johnson · Peper v. Princeton University Board of Trustees · Brewer v. Porch · State v. Tischio · Paper Mill Playhouse v. Millburn Township
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Any person who operates a motor vehicle on any public road, street or highway or quasi-public area in this State shall be deemed to have given his consent to the taking of samples of his breath for the purpose of making chemical tests to determine the content of alcohol in his blood; (e) No chemical test, as provided in this section, or specimen necessary thereto, may be made or taken forcibly and against physical resistance thereto by the defendant. The police officer shall, however, inform the person arrested of the consequences of refusing to submit to such test in accordance with [N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.4a]. A standard statement, prepared by the director, shall be read by the police officer to the person under arrest. [N./.S.A 39:4-50.2.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the arresting officer had probable cause to believe that the person had been driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle on the public highways or quasi-public areas of this State while the person was under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic, hallucinogenic, or habit-producing drug or marijuana; whether the person was placed under arrest, if appropriate, and whether he refused to submit to the test upon request of the officer. [N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.4a.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]uch an outcome would do nothing to curb the `senseless havoc and destruction caused by intoxicated drivers.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.