Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 Wash. App. 791 - State v. Smith

33 Wash. App. 791 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
October 2002
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2002

13 state decisions

60198319902000decided

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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · 92 Wash. 2d 755 - State v. Rhodes · 93 Wash. 2d 751 - State v. Tongate · 96 Wash. 2d 31 - State v. Cunningham · 76 Wash. 2d 368 - State v. Nass

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

  1. “(1) In its dispositional order, the court shall require the respondent to make restitution to any persons who have suffered loss or damage as a result of the offense committed by the respondent. In addition, restitution may be ordered for loss or damage if the offender pleads guilty to a lesser offense or fewer offenses and agrees with the prosecutor's recommendation that the offender be required to pay restitution to a victim of an offense or offenses which, pursuant to a plea agreement, are not prosecuted.... If the respondent participated in the crime with another person or other persons, all such participants shall be jointly and severally responsible for the payment of restitution....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Restitution" means financial reimbursement by the offender to the victim, and shall be limited to easily ascertainable damages for injury to or loss of property, actual expenses incurred for medical treatment for physical injury to persons, and lost wages resulting from physical injury. Restitution shall not include reimbursement for damages for mental anguish, pain and suffering, or other intangible losses. Nothing in this chapter shall limit or replace civil remedies or defenses available to the victim or offender[.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “that proof of loss for imposing restitution under the juvenile justice act requires a standard similar to that required to prove damages in a tort context, evidence sufficient to afford a reasonable basis for estimating the loss, e.g., Haner v. Quincy Farm Chems., Inc., 29 Wn. App. 93, 98 , 627 P.2d 571 (1981). We base this conclusion on a number of considerations.”
    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.