Beach v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2016
13 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 Schmerber v. State of California · 137 Wis. 2d 39 - State v. Zielke · Brown v. Hoblitzell · Little v. Commonwealth
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Exclusion of evidence for violating the provisions of the informed consent statute is not required. It has been held in Kentucky and elsewhere that in the absence of an explicit statutory directive, evidence should not be excluded for the violation of provisions of a statute where no constitutional right is involved. See Little v. Commonwealth, Ky., 438 S.W.2d 527 (1968)... ,[T]he overall purpose of the legislation was to facilitate obtaining evidence of driving while under the influence. KRS 446.080(1) provides that all statutes of this state shall be liberally construed with a view to promote their objects and to carry out the intent of the legislature.... [T]he statute contains no explicit or implicit directive from the General Assembly that requires exclusion of evidence obtained. The United States Supreme Court has held that a blood test does not violate the Federal Due Process Clause, the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel or the Fourth Amendment right to unlawful search and seizure. Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 , 86 S.Ct. 1826 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966). Exclusion of evidence for violating the provisions of the implied consent statute is not mandated absent an explicit statutory directive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“one (1) or more tests of his blood, breath, and urine, or combination thereof”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“When the preliminary breath test, breath test, or other evidence gives the peace officer reasonable grounds to believe there is impairment by a substance which is not subject to testing by a breath test, then blood or urine tests,'or both, may be required in addition to a breath test, or in lieu of a breath test;”
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.