State v. Heinrich’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
June 2005
most recently cited
1 district · 11 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Schmerber v. State of California · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · South Dakota v. Neville · West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish · Woods v. Holy Cross Hospital
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Any person who operates any vehicle in this state is considered to have given his consent to the withdrawal of blood or other bodily substance and chemical analysis of his blood, breath or other bodily substance to determine the amount of alcohol in his blood and to determine the presence of marijuana or any controlled drug or substance. The person shall be requested by the officer to submit to the withdrawal of blood or other bodily substance for chemical analysis or chemical analysis of his breath and shall be advised by the officer that: (1) If he refuses to submit to the withdrawal or chemical analysis, no withdrawal or chemical analysis may be required unless he has been arrested for a third, fourth or subsequent violation of § 32-23-1, constituting a felony offense under § 32-23^4 or 32 — 23—4.6[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lanier · State v. Stetter“Under SDCL 32-23-10, the predicates for admission of the results of a forced blood test are simple. ‘Once an individual has been convicted twice for a violation of SDCL 32-23-1 (DUI), a trooper is only required to inform an arrested person of the warnings outlined in SDCL 32-23-10, and the result of a compulsory blood alcohol test is admissible.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stetter
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.