Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 138 WASH2D 460 - State v. Wade

State v. Wade’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

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

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 2010

10 state decisions

80199920002010decided

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 79 Wash. 2d 12 - State Ex Rel. Carroll v. Junker · 100 Wash. 2d 26 - Smith v. Shannon · 98 Wash. 2d 358 - State v. Saltarelli · 102 Wash. 2d 689 - State v. Jackson · 125 Wash. 2d 825 - State v. Lane

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. “The rule permits the appellate court, in its discretion, to order supplementation of the record. Further, as a condition of the supplementation, the court may impose sanctions, as permitted in RAP 18.9(a), for a party's failure to comply with RAP 9.2(b). Although RAP 9.10 gives the appellate court the authority to order supplementation of the record, it plainly does not impose”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “State v. Wade, 92 Wash.App. 885, 893 , 966 P.2d 384 (1998) (emphasis added). We agree with the State's position that the Court of Appeals, lacking an adequate record, had two choices. It could have required supplementation of the deficient record, pursuant to RAP 9.10, or it could have declined to consider the ER 404(b) issue. RAP 9.10 provides that,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The court must determine the purpose of the evidence, find the evidence to be materially relevant, and balance its probative value against the potential for unfair prejudice.”
    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.