Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Sellenriek v. Director of Revenuegreen2 sentences2017“Maintenance checks” are defined as “the standardized and prescribed procedures used to determine, that a breath analyzer is functioning properly and is operating in accordance with the operational procedures established by [DHSS.]” 19 CSR 25-30.011(2)(F). “[T]he purpose of the maintenance check requirement is to ensure the reliability of a particular test result.” Sellenriek v. Director of Revenue, 826 S.W.2d 338, 340 (Mo. banc 1992). 2017Thus, the purpose of the maintenance check requirement is to ensure the reliability of a particular test result. 826 S.W.2d at 340 (internal citations omitted). | 6 | 7 |
Woodall v. Director of Revenuegreen2 sentences1993Woodall v. Director of Revenue, 795 S.W.2d 419, 420 (Mo.App.1990). 1992State v. Litterell, 800 S.W.2d 7, 11 (Mo.App.1990); Woodall, 795 S.W.2d at 420 . | 3 | 4 |
Kern v. Director of Revenuegreen2 sentences2020“Consequently, the purpose of the maintenance check requirement is to guarantee reliability of a particular test result.” Id. 2020“Consequently, the purpose of the maintenance check requirement is to guarantee reliability of a particular test result.” Id. | 1 | 3 |
Diehl v. Director of Revenuegreen1 sentence1998Diehl v. Director of Revenue, 836 S.W.2d 94, 96 (Mo.App.1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Litterellgreen1 sentence1992State v. Litterell, 800 S.W.2d 7, 11 (Mo.App.1990); Woodall, 795 S.W.2d at 420 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Reed v. Director of Revenue, State
green
2 sentences2009Id. at 837 . 2005Id. at 837 . | 2 | 2005–2009 |
State v. Bartholomew
green
1 sentence1992Id., at 53 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.