Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 Wash. App. 292 - State v. Hudspeth

22 Wash. App. 292 - State v. Hudspeth’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
September 1995
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Agurs · 87 Wash. 2d 783 - State v. Wright · 90 Wash. 2d 808 - State v. Canaday

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

  1. “Fundamental to either duty [the duty to preserve evidence or the duty to disclose it] is the prerequisite that the evidence destroyed, disposed of, or suppressed by the prosecution was material in the constitutional sense. The mere possibility that an item of undisclosed evidence might have helped the defense, or might have affected the outcome of the trial, does not establish “materiality” in the constitutional sense. [Emphasis added.]”
    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.