State v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

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

1. “(1) ex parte in-court testimony or its functional equivalent, such as affidavits, custodial examinations, and prior testimony that the defendant was unable to cross-examine; (2) extrajudicial statements contained in formalized testimonial materials, such as affidavits, depositions, prior testimony, or confessions; and (3) statements made under circumstances that would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 182 Wash. App. 266 - State v. Hudlow

2. “all contemplate formal statements given to police to help their investigations or formal testimony in a court setting. Crawfordv. Washington, 541 U.S. at 51-52 . Crawford specifically distinguished these formal statements from casual remarks. State v. Chambers, 134 Wn. App. at 862 . In State v. Chambers, our court summarized three nonexclusive definitions for”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of Washington v. Gary Bruce Farnworth