Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 481 NW2D 236 - State v. Messner

State v. Messner’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
3
states following
January 2012
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently January 2012

16 state decisions

100199220002010decided

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 Commonwealth v. Alano · 147 Ga. App. 300 - Puett v. State · 189 Ga. App. 800 - State v. Buffington · Williford v. State · 93 Wash. 2d 722 - City of Blaine v. Suess

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

  1. “Before the duty of the police arises to transport a defendant to the location of the test, he must first show that he had made arrangements with a qualified person of his own choosing, that the test would be made if he came to the hospital, that he so informed the personnel at the jail where he was under arrest, and that those holding him then either refused or in any event failed to take him to the hospital for that purpose.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] person arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to secure an additional test by a person of his own choosing if he requests one.... “[T]he meaning of a ‘reasonable opportunity’ to obtain an ex-animation may vary depending on the circumstances.” Law enforcement officers need not assist people in obtaining independent tests or even advise them of the right to an additional test. Law enforcement officers, however, “must not prevent or hinder an individual’s timely, reasonable attempts to obtain an independent examination.” Law enforcement officers must afford a reasonable opportunity and a motorist’s request for an additional test by a person of his own choosing must be a reasonable one. “What may be reasonable in one locality may be unreasonable in another.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We have held that police have no duty to inform a person of the right to an additional test. State v. Rambousek, 358 N.W.2d 223, 230 (N.D. 1984).”
    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.