Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 146 Wash. 114 - State v. Ryan

State v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

1927

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
4
states following
September 2009
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently September 2009 · most notably Richardson v. Hand (1958), State v. Boles (1964)

33 state decisions

100192719301940195019601970198019902000decided

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. Pridgeon · Coy · Burnham v. Spokane Mercantile Co. · Coyle v. Seattle Electric Co. · State v. Gilluly

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

  1. ““ ‘. . . It may be used to make the record speak the truth, but not to make it speak what it did not speak but ought to have spoken. . . . ’ ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The judgment in this case was not wholly void, but, at most, voidable. The excessive part of the sentence was an error of law, but one made by a court of record and of competent jurisdiction. Had the case been appealed, the trial court would have been directed to let the conviction, which was lawful, stand, but to pronounce the proper sentence. State v. Gilluly, 50 Wash. 1 , 96 Pac. 512 ; State v. Andrews, 71 Wash. 181 , 127 Pac. 1102 ; State v. Clark, 98 Wash. 81 , 167 Pac. 84 ; State v. Nicholes, 135 Wash. 333 , 237 Pac. 706 ; State v. Fairchild, 136 Wash. 132 , 238 Pac. 922 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Although the minimum sentence pronounced by the trial court was excessive under our statute, it was not an absolute nullity” (italics ours),”
    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.