32 Wash. App. 217 - State v. Gibson’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
September 1994
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Knapp v. United States · 73 Wash. 2d 533 - State v. Dana · 95 Wash. 2d 15 - State v. Alexis · State v. Steele · 95 Wash. 2d 888 - State v. Thompson
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) permit a party to argue his theory of the case; (2) not be misleading; and, (3) when read as a whole, properly inform the trier of fact on the law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Determination of admissibility of evidence for impeachment purposes is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Thompson, 95 Wn.2d 888 , 632 P.2d 50 (1981); State v. Alexis, 95 Wn.2d 15 , 621 P.2d 1269 (1980). The trial court's determination will not be reversed absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion. State v. Thompson, supra. In exercising its discretion, the trial court should balance the probative value of the prior conviction as it relates to the credibility of the witness against the potential prejudice to the defendant. State v. Anderson, 31 Wn. App. 352 , 641 P.2d 728 (1982).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is not necessary to establish intent by direct and positive evidence.”
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.