State v. Tracy’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
11 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Gonzalez v Raich · State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn · In Re Atlantic Richfield Co. In Re Castillo Ponce and in Re Torres Herrera · State v. JP
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Is a patient of a physician licensed under chapter 18.71 or 18.57 RCW; (b) Has been diagnosed by that physician as having a terminal or debilitating medical condition; (c) Is a resident of the state of Washington at the time of such diagnosis; (d) Has been advised by that physician about the risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana; and (e) Has been advised by that physician that they may benefit from the medical use of marijuana.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Soper · State v. Soper“Given the language of chapter 18.71 RCW, there is only one reasonable interpretation of the term "licensed." Our licensing scheme differentiates between physicians who are licensed in the state and those who are licensed in another state but who are permitted to practice medicine in Washington. As used in chapter 18.71 RCW, then, the term "licensed" is not synonymous with "permitted" or "allowed." Rather, physicians "licensed" under chapter 18.71 RCW met the qualifications of our regulatory guidelines and received a license from the State of Washington. Accordingly, we hold that only those physicians validly licensed in Washington may prescribe medical marijuana to persons in this state.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Soper · State v. Soper“(a) Meet all criteria for status as a qualifying patient; (b) Possess no more marijuana than is necessary for the patient's personal, medical use, not exceeding the amount necessary for a sixty-day supply; and (c) Present his or her valid documentation to any law enforcement official who questions the patient regarding his or her medical use of marijuana.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Soper · State v. Soper
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.