Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 Wash. App. 21 - State v. Clark

13 Wash. App. 21 - State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 2010

10 state decisions

6019751980199020002010decided

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 83 Wash. 2d 424 - State v. Gluck · 84 Wash. 2d 940 - State v. Lesnick · 84 Wash. 2d 527 - State v. Murray · 11 Wash. App. 523 - State of Washington v. Sinclair · 12 Wash. App. 274 - State v. Proctor

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

  1. “We hold that the officers in this case acted reasonably in detaining [the defendant] while they investigated the source of the alarm. The signal from the silent alarm device was a substantial indication that someone was forcing entry into the house. [The defendant's] appearance, conduct, and presence in the vicinity pointed directly toward his participation in the activation of the alarm. The police, acting for the citizenry, had the duty to investigate. This required [the defendant's] detention and an examination of the house. There was probable cause to arrest [the defendant] as soon as the fact of the burglary had been established. It appears from the evidence that sometimes silent alarm-type devices give a signal even though there has not been an illegal entry. If that occurred in this case, the blame for [the defendant's] temporary detention could properly be attributed to his being where he was under suspicious circumstances, rather than upon an unwarranted intrusion upon his freedom by the police.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a well-founded suspicion not amounting to probable cause”
    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.