121 Wash. 2d 220 - State v. Janes’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 140 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 146 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably 122 Wash. 2d 1 - Matter of Personal Restraint of Young (1993), State v. Nemeth (1998)
6 federal appellate · 140 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Frye v. United States · Gooding v. United States · 88 Wash. 2d 221 - State v. Wanrow · 98 Wash. 2d 484 - State v. McCullum · 120 Wash. 2d 879 - State v. Cauthron
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 146 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“from the standpoint of the reasonably prudent person, knowing all the defendant knows and seeing all the defendant sees.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is a defense to a charge of Murder in the Second Degree, Manslaughter in the First Degree, or Manslaughter in the Second Degree that the homicide was justifiable as defined in this instruction. Homicide is justifiable when committed in the lawful defense of the defendant when: (1) the defendant reasonably believed that the victim intended to inflict death or great personal injury; and (2) the defendant reasonably believed that there was imminent danger of such harm being accomplished; and (3) the defendant employed such force and means as a reasonably prudent person would use under the same or similar conditions as they reasonably appeared to the defendant, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances as they appeared to him, at the time of the incident. The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the homicide was not justifiable. If you find that the State has not proved the absence of this defense beyond a reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he objective aspect ... keeps self-defense firmly rooted in ... necessity. No matter how sound the justification, revenge can never serve as an excuse for murder. "`[T]he right of self-defense does not imply the right of attack in the first instance or permit action done in retaliation or revenge.'"”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bolar · State v. Studd
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.