State v. Hoglund’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 85 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Generally, the failure to properly raise an issue at the trial level precludes a party from raising that issue on appeal.”

   17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Silver · DURAL v. State

2. “Revocation of privilege to drive motor vehicle or moped upon refusal to submit to testing, (a)If a person under arrest refuses to submit to a breath or blood test, none shall be given, except as provided in section 286-163, but the arresting officer, as soon as practicable, shall submit an affidavit to a district judge of the circuit in which the arrest was made, stating: (1) That at the time of the arrest, the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe the arrested person had either been driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle or moped upon the public highways while under the influence of intoxicating liquor; (2) That the arrested person had been informed of the sanctions of this section; and (3) That the person had refused to submit to a breath or blood test. (b)Upon receipt of the affidavit, the district judge shall hold a hearing as provided in section 286-156, and shall determine whether the statements contained in the affidavit are true and correct. If the district judge finds the statements contained in the affidavit are true, the judge shall revoke the arrested person’s license, permit, or any nonresident privilege to operate a motor vehicle or moped in the State as follows: (1) For a first revocation, or any revocation not preceded within a five-year period by a revocation under this section, for a period of twelve months; and (2) For any subsequent revocation under this section, for a period not less than two years and not more than fiv”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Matautia

3. “not sufficiently reliable to support the severe sanction of imprisonment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Sinagoga