120 Wash. 2d 334 - State v. McDougal’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
91 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 128 Wash. 2d 40 - Lacey Nursing Center, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1995), 127 Wash. 2d 281 - State v. McCraw (1995)
91 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 Rideout v. United States · 79 Wash. 2d 12 - State Ex Rel. Carroll v. Junker · 87 Wash. 2d 374 - State v. Arndt · 114 Wash. 2d 828 - State v. Fjermestad · 93 Wash. 2d 329 - State v. Smith
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]nlikely, absurd or strained consequences resulting from a literal reading [of a statute] should be avoided.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) If an offender violates any condition or requirement of a sentence, the court may modify its order of judgment and sentence and impose further punishment in accordance with this section. . . . . (3) If an offender fails to comply with any of the requirements or conditions of a sentence the following provisions apply: (a)(i) Following the violation, if the offender and the department make a stipulated agreement, the department may impose sanctions such as work release, home detention with electronic monitoring, work crew, community restitution, inpatient treatment, daily reporting, curfew, educational or counseling sessions, supervision enhanced through electronic monitoring, jail time, or other sanctions available in the community. . . . . (iii) If the offender fails to comply with the sanction administratively imposed by the department, the court may take action regarding the original noncompliance. Offender failure to comply with the sanction administratively imposed by the department may be considered an additional violation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Nason · State v. Button“(3) If an offender fails to comply with any of the requirements or conditions of a sentence the following provisions apply: (c) The state has the burden of showing noncompliance by a preponderance of the evidence. If the court finds that the violation has occurred, it may order the offender to be confined for a period not to exceed sixty days for each violation, and may (i) convert a term of partial confinement to total confinement, (ii) convert community service obligation to total or partial confinement, (iii) convert monetary obligations, except restitution and the crime victim penalty assessment, to community service hours at the rate of the state minimum wage as established in RCW 49.46.020 for each hour of community service, or (iv) order one or more of the penalties authorized in (a)(i) of this subsection.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.