34 Wash. App. 865 - State v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2011
22 state decisions
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 87 Wash. 2d 922 - Johnson v. Morris · 95 Wash. 2d 15 - State v. Alexis · 91 Wash. 2d 591 - Pannell v. Thompson · 95 Wash. 2d 888 - State v. Thompson · 99 Wash. 2d 538 - State v. Hentz
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[d]isplays what appears to be a firearm or other deadly weapon,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Bratz · State v. Kennard“It seems to us that where the accused indicates (verbally or otherwise) the presence of a weapon (real or toy), the effect on the victim is the same whether it is actually seen by the victim or whether it is directed at the victim from inside a pocket. In either situation the apprehension and fear is created which leads the victim to believe the robber is truly armed with a deadly weapon. Accordingly, the victim feels compelled to comply with the accused's demand for money.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kennard · State v. Scherz“To convict the defendant, Anton Barker, of the crime of Robbery in the Second Degree, each of the following elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt: "(1) That on or about the 1st day of April, 1999, the defendant unlawfully took personal property of another from the person or in the presence of another; "(2) That the defendant intended to commit theft of the property; "(3) That the taking was against that person's will by the defendant's use or threatened use of immediate force, violence or fear of injury to that person; "(4) That force or fear was used by the defendant to obtain or retain possession of the property or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking; and "(5) That the acts occurred in The State of Washington.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Barker
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.