Palmer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “... the failure or inability to obtain an additional test by a person does not preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gundersen v. Municipality of Anchorage · Gundersen v. Municipality of Anchorage

2. “We think the situation in the case at bar, however, is readily distinguishable. When the videotape recording was made, Palmer was already under arrest. After being transported to police headquarters, he was asked to submit to a breathalyzer examination and to perform a number of sobriety tests. Assuming, arguendo, that he had any actual or subjective expectation at that point that his actions would not be recorded, we are convinced that that expectation is not one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable. Accordingly, we hold that there was no violation of the right of privacy guaranteed to Palmer by article 1, section 22, of the state constitution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Quinto v. City and Borough of Juneau