Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 Wash. App. 893 - State v. Edwards

23 Wash. App. 893 - State v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
4
states following
January 2013
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably 96 Wash. 2d 215 - State v. Williams (1981), Brodes v. State (2005)

25 state decisions

13019791980199020002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · United States v. Telfaire · 77 Wash. 2d 955 - State v. Rowe · 4 Wash. App. 745 - State v. Lane · 25 Wash. 2d 686 - State v. Fairbanks

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

  1. “Witness credibility is more properly tested by examination and cross-examination, and any weaknesses in eyewitness identification may be exposed by counsel in argument to the jury. State v. Jordan, [ 17 Wn. App. 542 , 564 P.2d 340 (1977)]. The general reasonable doubt instruction given by the trial judge enabled Edwards to argue his theory of the case and attack the victims' cred ibility. The trial judge did not err in refusing the proposed instruction.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “`You must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the accuracy of the identification of defendant as the person who committed the offense before you may convict him'”
    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.