Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 710 So. 2d 24 - Williams v. State

710 So. 2d 24 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
13
states following
February 2021
most recently cited

1 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably State v. Shadden (2010), State v. Baue (2000)

1 district · 29 state decisions — followed in 13 states

2401998200020102020decided

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 · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Frye v. United States · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Weissbrodt v. White Mountain Apache Tribe of Arizona

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

  1. “Such a use of HGN test results would raise a number of due process problems different from those associated with the chemical testing of bodily fluids. The arresting officer's `reading' of the HGN test cannot be verified or duplicated by an independent party.... The test's recognized margin of error provides problems as to criminal convictions which require proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The circumstances under which the test is administered at roadside may affect the reliability of the test results. Nystagmus may be caused by conditions other than alcohol intoxication....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The protocol essentially consists of a twelve step systematic assessment of the defendant’s vital signs and physical appearance, which in fact is the usual DUI investigation, including the standard field sobriety tests, plus a physical examination. The physical examination incorporates a narrow application of techniques borrowed from the medical field, and includes measuring pupil size and observing pupil reaction to light, taking blood pressure and pulse rate [three separate times], inspecting the oral and nasal cavities, and touching the arm to determine muscle tone.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]n order to lay a foundation for the admission of the arresting officer’s statement that [the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or another central nervous system depressant, the State was required to establish two predicates: first, that the HGN FST is a scientifically valid means of discriminating between BACs below 0.08 percent and those at or above 0.08 percent; and, second, that a BAC at or above 0.08 percent correlates with diminishment of [the defendant's mental or physical driving skills.”
    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.