People v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

54 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “because of the special insult to human dignity involved when police seek evidence in body apertures or bodily fluids, special rules restrict internal body searches”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Diaz · People v. Bradshaw

2. “[T]he evidence of the defendant's drinking on the day of the shooting could support no more than a mere suspicion that she might have been intoxicated several hours later when the blood and urine tests were ordered.... The slight liquor smell on her breath may have indicated that alcohol had been consumed, but, by itself, did not clearly indicate intoxication. To justify an internal search without consent or a warrant, there must be a `clear indication' that the defendant was intoxicated. But here there was mere suspicion uncorroborated by any of the familiar signs of intoxication.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Reynolds · Grassi v. People

3. “[in determining whether forced production of bodily fluids is permissible, the appropriate standard is clear indication that evidence of intoxication or drug abuse will be found. Moreover, there must be some indication that evidence of drugs or alcohol, if found, will be relevant to a crime for which the defendant may be charged.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Diaz · People v. Milhollin