165 Wis. 2d 143 - State v. Grade’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
June 1999
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Lord Electric Co. v. United States · 64 Wis. 2d 485 - Scales v. State · 137 Wis. 2d 39 - State v. Zielke · 95 Wis. 2d 191 - State v. Neitzel · 96 Wis. 2d 630 - State v. Burkman
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We conclude that "shall" is mandatory. It is reasonable to interpret the statute's objective to insure an accurate and reliable test. The chemical test procedures are mechanical in nature and consequently, intoxilyzer test results are entitled to automatic admissibility and to a prima facie presumption of accuracy to establish the defendant's blood alcohol level. We read the mandatory nature of the statute as the legislative quid pro quo for a driver's implied consent to testing for BAC. Furthermore, the reliance on the mechanical nature of the test and the justification for the automatic admissibility provision are severely undermined if the section is not given a mandatory reading. If the requirements of sec. 343.305(6)(c), Stats., are not strictly met, then the assurance of accuracy is no longer present.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“If there are not two samples or the sequence is not followed, then there is no "test" within the meaning of the statute. If there is no "test" within the meaning of the statute, then there are no test results available to be admitted into evidence. The person who. fails to give a complete breath test is considered to have refused consent....”
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.