124 Md. App. 543 - Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 10 state decisions

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In our view, the court erred in permitting Trooper Redmond to testify that, based on the HGN test results, he believed appellant’s blood alcohol content was “probably point one zero or higher.” Although the trooper was qualified to administer the HGN test and, to that extent, was properly received as an expert, HGN testing may not be used to establish a specific blood alcohol level. Indeed, as the lengthy colloquy that we quoted earlier makes plain, the State never sought to establish that the trooper’s expertise in administering the HGN test included the ability to determine specific blood alcohol content based on the HGN test results. The HGN test is a type of field sobriety test, but it is not the equivalent of laboratory chemical analysis of blood, breath, or urine.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 164 Md. App. 153 - Warren v. State

2. “inadmissible to estimate BAC in any manner, including estimates of BAC over .10%, in the absence of a chemical analysis of blood, breath, or urine.”); State v. Barker, 179 W.Va. 194 , 366 S.E.2d 642, 646 (1988) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Rose

3. “[w]e cannot ignore the heightened credence juries tend to give scientific evidence”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 177 Conn. App. 651 - State v. Lopez