People v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]hen Branchini arrested the defendant in March 2011, McNeely had yet to be decided, and Jones was binding precedent holding that not only did section 11-501.2(c)(2) 'clearly' allow for warrantless, nonconsensual blood draws in DUI cases involving the death or personal injury to another, it allowed for such draws in all DUI cases. [Citation.] Thus, Branchini could have reasonably relied on Jones as binding precedent authorizing the taking of the defendant's blood pursuant to section 11-501.2(c)(2). Accordingly, * * * the trial court properly determined that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule was applicable under the circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. People v. Turner

2. “consistent with general Fourth Amendment principles, * * * exigency in [the context of a DUI investigation] must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Eubanks

3. “the objectively ascertainable question whether a reasonably well trained officer would have known that the search was illegal in light of all of the circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. People v. Turner