Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 Wash. 2d 537 - State v. Mathe

102 Wash. 2d 537 - State v. Mathe’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
2
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

68 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably 123 Wash. 2d 260 - City of Seattle v. McCready (1994), State v. Ferrier (1998)

68 state decisions

31019841990200020102020decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · United States v. Matlock · United States v. Crews · Ker v. People of the State of Illinois

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

  1. “mutual use of the property by persons generally having joint access or control for most purposes.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “as the proper guide to determine test questions of consent issues under Const. art. I, § 7”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “common authority” standard as the proper approach to determining questions of consent under Const. art. 1, § 7. In that case, we emphasized two points: (1) the consenting party must be able to permit the search in his or her own right, and (2) it must be reasonable to find the defendant has assumed the risk another might permit a search. Both elements of the Mathe inquiry are met in this case. The tenants had authority to consent to the search of the common areas in their own right. Common authority rests”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.