2008 UT App 286 - State v. Roybal’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the statement that a person has been drinking, by itself—with no other facts regarding the amount of alcohol consumed, the type of beverage consumed, or the period of time over which the person consumed the alcohol ... does not provide an adequate basis on which to rationally infer that the person has an alcohol level beyond the legally proscribed limit or that the person consumed alcohol to the extent that he or she could not safely drive a vehicle.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Roybal

2. “When a citizen-informant has some kind of personal involvement with the suspect, the information conveyed is considered less reliable because there is a possibility that the citizen is making allegations out of anger, out of jealousy, or for other personal reasons.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Roybal

3. “Courts should evaluate the specific and articulable facts required to support reasonable suspicion in their totality, rather than looking at each fact in isolation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Roybal