Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 161 Me. 111 - State v. Merrow

State v. Merrow’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
August 1980
most recently cited

2 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 1980 · most notably State v. Collins (1972), State v. Smith (1971)

2 district · 28 state decisions

200196519701980decided

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 Jackson v. Denno · State v. Munsey · State v. Couture · State v. Priest · State v. Cleveland Grover

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

  1. ““The statute does not expressly state that a blood analysis, to be admissible, must be of blood extracted with consent of the defendant. However, there are strong and compelling statutory implications that consent is required. Under the statute the defendant has a choice (1) he may refuse a blood test, and this refusal is not to be used against him; or (2) he may desire to have the test made.” State v. Merrow, 161 Me. 111, 114 , 208 A.2d 659, 660 . “The statute itself establishes no rights as to the making of tests and imposes no obligations on the part of either arresting officers or respondent.” State v. Munsey, 152 Me. 198, 200 , 127 A.2d 79, 81 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““In summary, it is to be noted that in all cases involving questionable consent the Court must (1) determine at a preliminary hearing, without the presence of the jury, the issue of voluntary consent; (2) if the Court finds and formally rules the consent was involuntary the evidence should not be admitted; and (3) if the Court finds the consent was voluntary then the question is submitted to the jury with instructions that they may first determine its voluntariness and if they so find, then to accept it, giving to it such weight, credibility and probative force as they may determine.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Any person who operates or attempts to operate a motor vehicle within this State shall be deemed to have given consent to a chemical test to determine his blood-alcohol level by analysis of his blood or breath, if arrested for operating or attempting to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. “He shall be informed by a law enforcement officer of the tests available to him, and said accused shall select and designate one of the tests. At his request he may have a test of his blood administered by a physician of his choice, if reasonably available.””
    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.