1 Wash. App. 987 - State v. Brakes’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 1999
6 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 73 Wash. 2d 701 - State v. Stewart · 68 Wash. 2d 50 - State v. Badda · 72 Wash. 2d 31 - State v. Zorich · 76 Wash. 2d 522 - State v. Basford · 74 Wash. 2d 146 - State v. Jamerson
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To convict the defendant of the crime of Accepting the Earnings of a Common Prostitute, as charged in Count III of the information, the state must prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt: “(1) That James E. Akridge, III, during a period of time intervening between December 1, 1966 and January 24, 1967 did receive and accept any money earned by Florrine Morris in the practice of prostitution; “(2) That during said time said Florrine Morris was a common prostitute; “(3) That the above acts occurred in King County, Washington. “If you find from the evidence admitted in this case that the state has proved each of the above elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of Accepting Earnings of a Common Prostitute as charged in Count III of the information herein. “On the other hand, if after weighing all of the evidence you then entertain a reasonable doubt as to any element set forth above, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty as to Count III.””
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.