Wray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “at trial from the officer who conducted the tests runs afoul of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution in light of Crawford. That is, the State failed to establish an adequate evidentiary foundation for the admission of the test results into evidence. Hence, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting Napier's breath test results into evidence, and his conviction is reversed on this basis. SHARPNACK, J., and FRIEDLANDER, J., concur. 1 . Ind.Code § 9-30-5-1(a)(2). 2 . U.S. Const. Amend. VL. 3 . The meaning of”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Napier v. State

2. “in promulgating Section 1.1-1-2 of Title 260 of the Indiana Administrative Code, the department set forth the training that it believes breath test operators should receive before they can be considered certified and, therefore, before the results of tests that they administer may be admitted into evidence in a criminal drunk driving proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Lloyd

3. “[wlithout evidence of Wray's blood or breath aleohol content pursuant to a chemical analysis, we are unable to affirm his conviction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Napier v. State