Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 276 SW3D 579 - Kirsch v. State

Kirsch v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Matlock · Almanza v. State · Johnson v. State · Romero v. State · Hooper v. State

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. “Let's focus on the specifics. The instruction that you got when [the BAC-test result] came in, that was given to you to consider that particular evidence at that particular time in the trial. That instruction is gone now.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “they tend to make it more probable that [the defendant] was intoxicated at the time of driving under both the per se and impairment definitions of intoxication”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]o the extent that the instruction said the test could only show appellant ingested alcohol, the instruction was erroneous.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.