Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 Wash. App. 37 - State v. Blum

17 Wash. App. 37 - State v. Blum’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
4
states following
December 1986
most recently cited

18 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 79 Wash. 2d 512 - State v. Randecker · 87 Wash. 2d 85 - Fenimore v. Donald M. Drake Construction Co. · State v. Smith · 13 Wash. App. 71 - State v. Geer · 83 Wash. 2d 558 - State v. Hill

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

  1. “(3) In any prosecution for the crime of rape or for an attempt to commit, or an assault with an intent to commit any such crime evidence of the victim's past sexual behavior including but not limited to the victim's marital behavior, divorce history, or general reputation for promiscuity, nonchastity, or sexual mores contrary to community standards is not admissible if offered to attack the credibility of the victim and is admissible on the issue of consent only pursuant to the following procedure: (a) A written pretrial motion shall be made by the defendant to the court and prosecutor stating that the defense has an offer of proof of the relevancy of evidence of the past sexual behavior of the victim proposed to be presented and its relevancy on the issue of the consent of the victim. (b) The written motion shall be accompanied by an affidavit or affidavits in which the offer of proof shall be stated. (c) If the court finds that the offer of proof is sufficient, the court shall order a hearing out of the presence of the jury, if any, and the hearing shall be closed except to the necessary witnesses, the defendant, counsel, and those who have a direct interest in the case or in the work of the court. (d) At the conclusion of the hearing, if the court finds that the evidence proposed to be offered by the defendant regarding the past sexual behavior of the victim is relevant to the issue of the victim's consent; is not inadmissible because its probative value is substantially o”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit cross-examination of the victim on the issue of past sexual behavior when the prosecution presents evidence in its case in chief tending to prove the nature of the victim's past sexual behavior, but the court may require a hearing pursuant to subsection (3) of this section concerning such evidence."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Such evidence [specific acts of sexual misconduct by the prosecutrix] has little or no relationship to either the ability of the prosecuting witness to tell the truth under oath or her alleged consent to the intercourse.”
    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.