84 N.C. App. 111 - State v. White’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 2013
9 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schmerber v. State of California · State v. Strickland · State v. Howren
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because these readings were taken from “consecutively administered tests” on adequate breath samples given within eleven minutes of one another, and because the readings are within .01 of one another, the statute requiring sequential testing was, in our view, complied with in this case. To hold otherwise would allow an accused to thwart the testing process by deliberately giving insufficient breath samples.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(2) That the test results may only be used to prove a person's particular alcohol concentration if: a. The pair of readings employed are from consecutively administered tests; and b. The readings do not differ from each other by an alcohol concentration greater than 0.02.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Tew
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.