150 Wash. 2d 448 - State v. Baldwin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 22 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “person [shall] be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jackman · State v. Baldwin

2. “(1) No person may knowingly use or knowingly transfer a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity harming or intending to harm the person whose identity is used, or for committing any felony. "(2) For purposes of this section, `means of identification' means any information or item that is not describing finances or credit but is personal to or identifiable with any individual or other person, including any current or former name of the person, telephone number, and electronic address or identifier of the individual or any member of his or her family, including the ancestor of such person; any information relating to a change in name, address, telephone number, or electronic address or identifier of the individual or his or her family; any social security, driver's license, or tax identification number of the individual or any member of his or her family; and other information which could be used to identify the person, including unique biometric data. "(3) Violation of this section is a class C felony. "(4) A person [who] violates this section is liable for five hundred dollars or actual damages, including costs to repair the person's credit record, whichever is greater, and reasonable attorneys' fees. If the person violating this section is a business that repeatedly violates this section, that person also violates the consumer protection act, chapter 19.86 RCW.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Baldwin · State v. Milam

3. “`whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jackman · State v. Hughes