Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 12 Wash. App. 548 - State v. Johnson

12 Wash. App. 548 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
April 1992
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 1992

15 state decisions

90197519801990decided

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 Pope v. Nebraska · 84 Wash. 2d 256 - State v. Carothers · 80 Wash. 2d 293 - Friedlander v. Friedlander · 82 Wash. 2d 584 - State v. J-R Distributors, Inc. · 68 Wash. 2d 304 - State v. Louie

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

  1. “A trial judge, in conducting a trial, is more than a mere umpire. He must oversee and direct the trial to the end that the merits of the case be reached with reasonable dispatch and with fairness to the parties litigant. . . . the trial judge during trial may exercise discretion concerning such matters as the order of proof, the use of leading or impeaching questions, the qualifications of a witness to testify, the admissibility of evidence in passing on objections, claiming the evidence is irrelevant or remote, the scope of direct, cross, redirect, or subsequent examination of witnesses, the phrasing of instructions, the order in which the instructions are given, and the statement of reasons for rulings made.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Defendant contends the court committed prejudicial error by allowing the State to impeach its own witness Martin on redirect examination by showing his bias. . . . It is true that whether a- party will be permitted to impeach his witness by evidence of bias is usually treated “as included within the prohibition against impeachment.” 3A J. Wigmore, Evidence § 901 (Chadbourn rev. ed. 1970). The court may allow such evidence in its discretion. [Citations omitted.] We find no abuse here.”
    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.