State v. Morale’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2020
21 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schmerber v. State of California · Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor · South Dakota v. Neville · Pennsylvania v. Muniz
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every person who operates, attempts to operate, or is in actual physical control of any vehicle on a highway in this State is deemed to have given consent to an evidentiary test of that person's breath for the purpose of determining the person's alcohol concentration or the presence of other drug in the blood.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[b]ecause a DUI suspect is already deemed to have consented to the breath test, no impermissible coercion is involved when the suspect refuses to submit to take the test.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Rather than enforce the implied consent statute by compelling a DUI suspect to produce a breath sample, however, the Legislature has chosen to penalize the refusal to produce a sample voluntarily.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Edelman
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.