State v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

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

1. “1. The Court finds the seizure of the Defendant's blood from the Hospital and subsequent search of that blood by the DPS lab constitute a search and seizure within the scope of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 9 of the Texas Constitution. 2. The initial seizure of Juan Martinez's blood from the Hospital by the State using a Grand Jury Subpoena was a valid seizure. However, 3. The search of the blood was performed without the necessary search warrant. The blood had been drawn and was no longer subject to mutation or metabolization. Further, the blood was in the possession of the DPS and not subject to destruction. There were no exigent circumstances to justify a search of the blood without a warrant. 4. The search of the blood, and the subsequent blood test results, are found to be inadmissible at this time.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Martinez