Holman v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2023
13 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schmerber v. State of California · State, Department of Highways v. Beckey · State v. Severino · Wiseman v. Sullivan
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Obviously the arresting officer cannot know the subjective state of mind of the person arrested and whether he in fact intended his response to a request to take a blood test to be the equivalent of a refusal that would result in license revocation. The test must be objective; otherwise the whole statutory scheme could be subverted by one who equivocates or remains silent, and later protests that it was his unexpressed intent to take the test. However, the behavior of the driver must clearly indicate, judged objectively, that the driver intended to refuse to take the test.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The question of whether or not a motorist was confused and manifested his confusion to the arresting officer is for the trier of fact to determine, as is the question of whether the officer sufficiently explained the obligation to be: tested pursuant to the implied consent law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[W]hen a driver suspected of driving under the influence is arrested, he is at that point involved in a criminal proceeding and must be given the Miranda warning if his subsequent statements are to be admitted in a criminal proceeding against him. [Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. Cox
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.