123 Wash. 2d 656 - State v. Corliss’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Fordyce v. City of Seattle (1995), State v. Clark (2007)
3 federal appellate · 26 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 United States v. White · United States v. Caceres · 106 Wash. 2d 54 - State v. Gunwall · 119 Wash. 2d 192 - State v. Salinas · Zuber v. Allen
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]here was no violation of the statute because the conversation was not “intercepted” by a “device” designed to record or transmit. Here the officers did not “intercept” an otherwise private communication by means of any kind of device. They simply listened, in person, to what they could hear emanating from the telephone. Because there was no device used to record or transmit the conversation, we conclude that by the plain language of the statute, it is not applicable under the facts in this case.[ 27 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Christensen
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.