Smith v. Charnes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A statute that forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that persons of common intelligence must necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ as to its application”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. League of Women Voters of Colorado v. Davidson · METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. v. State

2. “[Tjhere is an abundance of information available that illustrates the amount of different alcoholic beverages that an individual might consume before reaching a specific blood alcohol content level.... Considering the availability of such information and the fact that the consequences of statutes like section 42-2-122.1 can be avoided by the exercise of reasonable moderation, we conclude that section 42-2-122.1 provides sufficient notice of the conduct that has been determined to be unlawful to meet the requirements of due process.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hancock v. State, Department of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Division · Nefzger v. Colorado Department of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Division

3. “(I) Drove a vehicle in this state when the amount of alcohol in such person’s blood was 0.15 or more grams of alcohol per hundred milliliters of blood or 0.15 or more grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath at the time of the commission of the alleged offense or within one hour thereafter, as shown by chemical analysis of such person’s blood or breath.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nefzger v. Colorado Department of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Division · Colorado Division of Revenue v. Lounsbury