Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 Wash. App. 432 - State v. Simmons

30 Wash. App. 432 - State v. Simmons’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
August 2000
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 2000

18 state decisions

100198119902000decided

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 Anders v. California · 95 Wash. 2d 616 - State v. Jones · 24 Wash. App. 495 - State v. King · 78 Wash. 2d 184 - State v. Theobald · Proctor v. United States

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

  1. “(1) Every person who shall without the permission of the owner or person entitled to the possession thereof intentionally take or drive away any automobile or motor vehicle . . . and every person voluntarily riding in or upon said . . . vehicle with knowledge of the fact that the same was unlawfully taken shall be . . . guilty of taking a motor vehicle without permission.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “of the vehicle is found in the role each played in arranging the deprivation in the first place. Accordingly, the crime of taking a motor vehicle without permission is a crime of dishonesty under either prong of RCW 9A.56.070. The trial court thus properly admitted into evidence Smith's prior convictions for taking a motor vehicle without permission. Affirmed. 1 Trepanier's entire argument is premised on the fact that the trial court”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “whenever the actual existence of any particular mental state is a necessary element to constitute a particular species or degree of crime, the fact of [the defendant's] intoxication may be taken into consideration in determining such mental state.”
    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.