Tyner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2004
8 state decisions
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 96 Wash. 2d 816 - State v. Franco · Foremost Life Insurance v. Department of Insurance · State v. Rollins · Doyle v. State · People v. Mertz
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) At any proceeding concerning an offense under IC 9-30-5, evidence of the amount by weight of alcohol that was in the blood of the person charged with the offense: (1) at the time of the alleged violation; or (2) within the time allowed for testing under section 2 of this chapter; as shown by an analysis of the person’s breath, blood, urine, or other bodily substance, is admissible. (b) If, in a prosecution for an offense under IC 9-30-5, evidence establishes that: (1) a chemical test was performed on a test sample taken from the person charged with the offense within the period of time allowed for testing under section 2 of this chapter; and (2) the person charged with the offense had at least ten-hundredths percent (0.10%) by weight of alcohol in the person’s blood at the time the test sample was taken; the trier of fact shall presume that the person charged with the offense had at least ten-hundredths percent (0.10%) by weight of alcohol in the person’s blood at the time the person operated the vehicle. However, this presumption is rebuttable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mordacq v. State“nor does it enumerate specific substances that may affect the breath test. Rather, it precludes any foreign substance in the test subject's mouth within twenty minutes prior to the time a breath sample is taken. Guy directs us to Black's Law Dictionary, which defines”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Guy v. State“[Three hours is, in terms of the admissibility of a chemical test, not a magic time period. Test results which are taken within the three-hour period are not automatically admissible; nor are test results taken after three hours automatically inadmissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mullins v. State
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.