Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 324 SC 232 - Washington v. State

Washington v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2016

6 state decisions

50199620002010decided

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 Giglio v. United States · Aice v. State · State v. Williams · Davis v. State · Webb v. State

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

  1. “in his April 1992 order. [1] He asserted the PCR judge's 1992 order did not conform to his oral ruling at the PCR hearing. The PCR judge granted respondent's motion and issued an order amending his prior PCR order. In this amended order, the PCR judge stated that since the Supreme Court”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “respondent was entitled to a new trial. It is from this order that the State sought and was granted a writ of certiorari. Respondent's second PCR application is successive. See S.C.Code Ann. § 17-27-90 (1976) (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Successive PCR applications are not favored, and the applicant has the burden of proving that the grounds raised in a successive application could not have been raised in a previous application.”
    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.