Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 N.J. Super. 484 - State v. Kaye

176 N.J. Super. 484 - State v. Kaye’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
June 2006
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2006

14 state decisions

110198019902000decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · Tollett v. Henderson · Davis v. Alaska · United States v. Augenblick

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

  1. “We hold to the view that where an entire sample of a specimen, such as blood, is, as here, in good faith, consumed or destroyed during the testing process by a recognized law enforcement or other qualified laboratory, the consumption or destruction of the specimen does not constitute an act of suppression of evidence by the State sufficient to trigger a due process violation, warranting the suppression of the test results. [ Kaye, supra, 176 N.J.Super. at 490 , 423 A. 2d 1002 .]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Motion to Suppress Evidence and for Return of Property ........ (d) Appellate Review. Denial of a motion made pursuant to this rule may be reviewed on appeal from a judgment of conviction notwithstanding that such judgment is entered following a plea of guilty.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “issues relating to the admissibility of statements by defendant... immediately prior to jury selection.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.