State v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
85 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently July 2025 · most notably City of Columbus v. Aleshire (2010), State v. Syx (2010)
85 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 Crawford v. Washington · Mapp v. Ohio · United States v. Matlock · Weeks v. United States · United States v. Raddatz
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“judicial officials at suppression hearings 'may rely on hearsay and other evidence, even though that evidence would not be admissible at trial.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Woltz · State v. Cummins“Evidentiary objections challenging the competency, admissibility, relevancy, authenticity, and credibility of the chemical test results may still be raised at trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A senior operator shall perform an instrument check on approved evidential breath testing instruments and a radio frequency interference (RFI) check no less frequently than once every seven days in accordance with the appropriate instrument checklist for the instrument being used. The instrument check may be performed anytime up to one hundred and ninety-two hours after the last instrument check. (1) The instrument shall be checked to detect RFI using a handheld radio normally used by the law enforcement agency. The RFI detector check is valid when the evidential breath-testing instrument detects RFI or aborts a subject test. If the RFI detector check is not valid, the instrument shall not be used until the instrument is serviced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.