State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably State v. Brown (2012), State v. Ultreras (2013)
1 federal appellate · 60 state decisions
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 Schad v. Arizona · 101 Wash. 2d 566 - State v. Petrich · 110 Wash. 2d 403 - State v. Kitchen · 87 Wash. 2d 374 - State v. Arndt · 125 Wash. 2d 212 - State v. Wilson
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An assault is an intentional touching or striking of another person, with unlawful force, that is harmful or offensive regardless of whether any physical injury is done to the person. A touching or striking is offensive if the touching or striking would offend an ordinary person who is not unduly sensitive.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]hen the crime charged can be committed by more than one means, the defendant does not have a right to a unanimous jury determination as to the alleged means used to carry out the charged crime or crimes should the jury be instructed on more than one of those means. . . . But, in order to safeguard the defendant's constitutional right to a unanimous verdict as to the alleged crime, substantial evidence of each of the relied-on alternative means must be presented.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the constitutional right to a unanimous jury verdict is not implicated and the alternative means doctrine does not apply. In re Pers. Restraint of Jeffries, 110 Wn.2d 326, 339 , 752 P.2d 1338 (1988)(refusing to accept defendant's claim that the jury should be additionally instructed on the subalternatives of the statutory alternatives at issue). Smith, 159 Wn.2d at 783 . To be clear,”
2 later decisions 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.