State v. Albrecht’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited
31 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Carolan v. Hill · Messina v. Iowa Department of Job Service · Bernau v. Iowa Department of Transportation · United Fire & Casualty Co. v. Acker · State v. Palmer
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[In .interpreting statutes] [o]ur goal ... is to discover the true intention of the legislature. In searching for legislative intent, we consider not only the language of the statute, but also its. subject matter, the object sought to be aceom-plished, the purpose to be served, underlying. policies,, remedies provided, and the consequences of various interpretations. Additionally, we construe a statute in a way that would avoid impractical or absurd results. And'we look at the whole statute, not just separate parts. '”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rankin · State v. Jentz“7.5(2) Any peace officer using an approved device shall follow the instructions furnished by the manufacturer for use of such a device. Each unit shall be calibrated at least once per month using either a wet alcohol standard or a dry gas standard. The officer or officer’s department shall keep a record of each calibration. This record shall include: a. The [identity of the] officer performing the calibration. b. Date c. The value and type of standard used. d. Unit type and identification number.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bird“In Albrecht, the court concluded, Because of the PBT’s unreliability, the legislature chose to make the results inadmissible in evidence. However, the PBT provides officers with the tool of a quick, convenient test to assist officers in determining whether an arrest should be made. The PBT no longer fulfills the legislative intent that it serve as a quick, convenient test when officers must administer a second PBT.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Thompson
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.