39 Wash. App. 416 - State v. Killen’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 2014
6 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 Barrett v. United States · Obear-Nester Glass Co. v. Walgreen Drug Stores, Inc. · State v. Guthrie · State v. Phillips · State ex rel. Murphy v. Superior Court for Whatcom County
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Statutory and common law authorize[s] the court to excuse veniremen on its own motion. "To deny this right would be out of harmony with the policy of the law, which charges the court with the responsibility of insuring that qualified and impartial grand jurors are secured." State v. Guthrie, [ 185 Wash. 464, 475 , 56 P.2d 160 (1936)]. Review [is] based on the abuse of discretion standard .... RCW 2.36.100 provides the trial court may excuse the veniremen "upon a showing of undue hardship, extreme inconvenience, ... or any reason deemed sufficient by the court. . ." An earlier version of the statute . . . was held to vest wide discretion in the trial court. In State v. Phillips, 65 Wash. 324 , 118 P. 43 (1911), doubt was raised about a venireman's citizenship. The trial court excused him without proof he was not a United States citizen. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding the fact a venireman may have been rejected on insufficient grounds is of no consequence unless as a result an unqualified juror is selected.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“To deny this right would be out of harmony with the policy of the law, which charges the court with the responsibility of insuring that qualified and impartial grand jurors are secured.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“upon a showing of undue hardship, extreme inconvenience, ... or any reason deemed sufficient by the court. . .”
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.