Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 P.3d 1245 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
1
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

82 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably In Re Goodwin (2002), State v. Delgado (2003)

82 state decisions

660200920102020decided

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 Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Lynce v. Mathis · 119 Wash. 2d 452 - In Re F.D. Processing, Inc. · 111 Wash. 2d 353 - In Re the Personal Restraint of Williams · 110 Wash. 2d 504 - State v. Belgarde

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

  1. “Any sentence imposed under this chapter shall be determined in accordance with the law in effect when the current offense was committed.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the list of a defendant's prior convictions and juvenile adjudications, whether in this state, in federal court, or elsewhere.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “RCW 9.94A.345 is intended to cure any ambiguity that might have led to the Washington supreme court's decision in State v. Cruz , Cause No. 67147-8 [ 139 Wash.2d 186 , 985 P.2d 384 ] (October 7, 1999). A decision as to whether a prior conviction shall be included in an individual's offender score should be determined by the law in effect on the day the current offense was committed. RCW 9.94A.345 is also intended to clarify the applicability of statutes creating new sentencing alternatives or modifying the availability of existing alternatives.”
    3 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.