37 Wash. App. 474 - State v. Bockman’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably 110 Wash. 2d 32 - State v. Ng (1988), State v. Cronin (2000)
3 federal appellate · 41 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 Franks v. Delaware · Simmons v. United States · Payton v. New York · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There was ample evidence independent of the dog track of Ellis upon which this jury convicted. The officers testified that in the vicinity of Dunlap School at 3:00 a.m., there was little or no other traffic. Officer Rix heard people running inside the building. Officer Beaver saw the two black males flee the south alcove of the school and scale the fence. Chapman, the other apprehended suspect, matched the description Officer Beaver broadcast to all units. Chapman's fingerprint matched one recovered at the school. Ellis admitted under oath that he and Chapman were friends. Ellis's claim that he was out jogging at 3:00 a.m. lacked credibility when compared to the totality of evidence. In sum, then, the court's failure to instruct the jury that dog tracking evidence alone was insufficient was harmless error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A person is an accomplice in the commission of a crime, if, with knowledge that it will promote or facilitate the commission of the crime, he or she either: 1) solicits, commands, encourages, or requests another person to commit the crime; or 2) aids or agrees to aid another person in planning or committing the crime. The word “aid'' means all assistance whether given by words, acts, encouragement, support or presence. A person who is present at the scene and is ready to assist by his or her presence is aiding in the commission of the crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sarausad v. Porter“[e]vidence of an identification should be excluded only if the identification procedure was so impermissibly suggestive as to create a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification”), review denied, 102 Wn.2d 1002 (1984); State v. Alferez, 37 Wn. App. 508, 512 , 681 P.2d 859 (1984) (merging the two steps together in determining that”
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.