706 So. 2d 1308 - Steiner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2017
7 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 Lombard v. Marcera · United States v. Oates · United States v. Orozco · United States v. Wilmer · 474 So. 2d 168 - Bush v. City of Troy
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" Section 32-5A-194 (a)(1), Ala. Code 1975, provides that blood alcohol tests shall be admissible so long as the tests 'have been performed according to the methods approved by the Department of Forensic Sciences.' The rules of the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences relating to chemical tests for intoxication, Chapter 370-1-1, provide that breath-testing equipment shall be inspected at least once each calendar month by an implied consent unit inspector for the Department of Public Safety. (C.R. 45-52.) Thus, blood alcohol test results may be admissible under the *Page 1116 statute if the officer who performed the inspection testifies that the device was properly calibrated. "In Ex parte Mayo , the Alabama Supreme Court set out an alternate method for establishing the necessary predicate for the introduction of I-5000 results: " 'To establish a predicate for admitting the test results, without reliance on the statute [§ 32-5A-194 , Ala. Code 1975], there should be evidence that: " '(1) the theory underlying the photoelectric intoximeter test is valid and generally accepted as such; " '(2) the intoximeter is a reliable instrument and is generally accepted as such; " '(3) the intoximeter test was administered by a qualified individual who could properly conduct the test and interpret the results, and " '(4) the instrument used in conducting the test was in good working condition and the test was conducted in such a manner as to secure accurate results.' " 652 So.2d 201 , 20”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the exclusionary provisions of Rule 803(8)(B) were intended to apply to observations made by law enforcement officials at the scene of a crime or the apprehension of the accused and not `records of routine, nonadversarial matters' made in a nonadversarial setting.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“only to matters observed or investigated by police in adversarial, investigative circumstances where those involved may well have a motivation to misrepresent in order to secure a conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.