Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 P.3d 1116 - State v. Eckenrode

State v. Eckenrode’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924

Relies on 119 Wash. 2d 192 - State v. Salinas · 101 Wash. 2d 664 - State v. Rupe · 147 Wash. 2d 330 - State v. Brown · 122 Wash. 2d 270 - State v. Valdobinos · State v. Eastmond

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

  1. “But we are also mindful of the legislative purpose in creating the deadly weapons enhancement: to recognize that armed crime, including having weapons available to protect contraband, imposes particular risks of danger on society.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Reviewing the facts, we said: The rifle was loaded at the time, and Eckenrode testified that the pistol was as well. Eckenrode also had a police scanner, which, together with his manufacturing operation, raises the inference that he was monitoring police activity against the chance he might be raided. Finally, evidence of the drug manufacturing operation pervaded the house. A jury could readily have found that the weapons were there to protect the criminal enterprise. Eckenrode, 159 Wash.2d at 494 , 150 P.3d 1116 (emphasis added). Likewise, in Schelin we said that the nexus test”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “As long as any rational trier of fact could have found that he was armed, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, sufficient evidence exists.”
    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.