Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 N.C. 608 - State v. Powell

State v. Powell’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
3
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably State v. Eubanks (1973), 139 N.C. App. 33 - State v. Tappe (2000)

38 state decisions

24019711980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on State v. Moore · Robinson Ex Rel. Robinson v. Life & Casualty Insurance · State v. Willard · State v. Cummings · State v. Mobley

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

  1. ““This section of the statute requires two things before a chemical analysis of a person’s breath can be considered valid. First, it requires that such analysis shall have been performed according to methods approved by the State Board of Health. Second, it requires that such analysis shall have been made by an individual possessing a valid permit issued by the State Board of Health for this purpose.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““G.S. 20-139.1 (b) requires two things before a chemical analysis of a person’s breath or blood can be considered valid under that section. First, that such analysis shall be performed according to methods approved by the State Board of Health, and second, that such analysis be made by a person possessing a valid permit issued by the State Board of Health for this purpose. Officer Pegram had a valid permit issued by the Board to conduct such analysis and testified that he made the analysis in this case according to methods approved by that Board. We hold this sufficient to meet the requirements of G.S. 20-139.1 (b).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.