Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We note, however, that there was conflicting testimony regarding the sincerity of Thomas' efforts to perform the breath test. Finding he intentionally failed to supply a sufficient breath sample was therefore within the purview of the factfinder as judge of the witnesses' credibility. Thomas relies upon Burson v. Collier, 226 Ga. 427, 428-429 (1)(a), (2), 175 S.E.2d 660 (1970), for the proposition that failure to supply a sufficient breath sample may not be considered a refusal. Burson , however, is distinguishable. In that case, the accused motorist suffered from emphysema, and the trier of fact did not find he had refused to complete the test. Id. Here, however, the evidence would support a finding that Thomas intentionally refused to complete the test designated by the state, and therefore had no right to obtain a test of his own choosing. See Duckett, supra.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Cherry