State v. Ceglowski’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 856 (§ 416 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on 119 Wash. 2d 192 - State v. Salinas · Sturman v. United States · 94 Wash. 2d 634 - State v. Delmarter · Kansas v. Colorado · Zaidi v. Northern Virginia Hospital Corp.
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[k]nowingly to keep or maintain any store, shop, warehouse, dwelling, building, vehicle, boat, aircraft, or other structure or place, which is resorted to by persons using controlled substances in violation of this chapter for the purpose of using these substances, or which is used for keeping or selling them in violation of this chapter. [6]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“whether the totality of the evidence is sufficient to prove all the required elements.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Marin
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.