156 Wash. 2d 507 - State v. Bisson’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably State v. Yates (2007), State v. Barber (2011)
35 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 United States v. Harvey · United States v. De la Fuente · 110 Wash. 2d 528 - State v. Miller · In the Matter of Charles · 123 Wash. 2d 678 - Lynott v. National Union Fire Insurance
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where the terms of a plea agreement conflict with the law or the defendant was not informed of the sentencing consequences of the plea, the defendant must be given the initial choice of a remedy to specifically enforce the agreement or withdraw the plea. The prosecutor bears the burden of demonstrating that the defendant's choice of remedy is unjust.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“because the State has conceded nothing more than uncertainty in the provision and because we find the State's concession reasonable, the specific performance that Bisson requests must be denied.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. In Re Murillo“specific performance would have been an available remedy here, had the State expressly promised Bisson that his five 24-month weapon enhancements would be served concurrently.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. In Re Murillo
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.