20 Wash. App. 184 - State v. Mayes’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2009
18 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 Hankerson v. North Carolina · 88 Wash. 2d 221 - State v. Wanrow · 88 Wash. 2d 887 - Roberts v. Atlantic Richfield Co. · 36 Wash. 2d 367 - State v. Goebel · 88 Wash. 2d 337 - State v. Roberts
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] the interceptions took place in California, [2] were principally to aid California police, and [3] were not used to further any criminal activity in the state of Washington.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fowler“Washington has no criminal jurisdiction over actions having no effect in this state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fowler“between points within or without the state”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fowler
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.