110 Wash. 2d 90 - State v. Standifer’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably 117 Wash. 2d 263 - State v. Smith (1991), 135 Wash. 2d 326 - State v. Riles (1998)
48 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 91 Wash. 2d 132 - Vita Food Products, Inc. v. State · 108 Wash. 2d 527 - State v. Bernhard · 102 Wash. 2d 271 - State v. Theilken · 72 Wash. 2d 397 - Bowen v. Statewide City Employees Retirement System · 44 Wash. App. 698 - State v. Bodey
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Words are given the meaning provided by the statute or, in the absence of specific definition, their ordinary meaning.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“does not adequately define many of the mechanisms that allow people to obtain access to credit and checking accounts. Changing the definition will make it easier for prosecutors to establish certain types of fraudulent transactions. State v. Standifer, 110 Wash.2d at 94 , 750 P.2d 258 , quoting House Bill Rep. 508, at 2, 50th Legislature (1987). In the same enactment, the legislature added the phrase”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Chang · State v. Chang“[c]ommon experience indicates that this portion of the statute was intended to describe the card issued by a bank with which the holder can obtain money, goods or services from a seller or provider thereof in consideration of the issuer’s promise to pay the seller or provider, then looking to the cardholder for payment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Castillo
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.