40 Wash. 2d 648 - State v. Wolf’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 1979
3 federal appellate · 9 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 People v. Gray · State v. Workman · State v. Coella · State v. Jackson · State v. Jones
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the reputation of the prosecuting witness for chastity were to be held admissible as going to her general credibility, then logically such testimony would be equally admissible as to the credibility of any female who might be called to give evidence in any case. The court properly excluded the evidence as to the reputation of the prosecuting witness for chastity.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Our immediate concern is with regard to the second of the two categories of evidence referred to above. It will therefore not be useful to recount in detail the development of the rule relative to the admissibility of evidence as to specific acts of misconduct. It may be noted, however, that the rule permitting the parties to introduce such evidence as a matter of right, as distinguished from judicial discretion, has been applied only in cases involving seduction (State v. Jones, 80 Wash. 588 , 142 Pac. 35 ), statutory rape (State v. Godwin, 131 Wash. 591 , 230 Pac. 831 ), and gambling (State v. Smith, 145 Wash. 250 , 259 Pac. 711 ). The latter case was overruled, in effect, in State v. Gaffney, 151 Wash. 599 , 276 Pac. 873 , 65 A.L.R. 405 , and the rule permitting such evidence as a matter of right was completely abandoned as to all types of cases in State v. Linton, 36 Wn. (2d) 67, 216 P. (2d) 761 . In that decision, involving a charge of statutory rape, it was held that the admission of evidence as to specific acts of misconduct, to affect credibility, rested within the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Linton left the door open to receive evidence as to specific acts of immoral conduct if the trial court, in its discretion, found it acceptable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“If the witness’ reputation for chastity is so bad that it has in some way affected his or her reputation for truth and veracity, then the direct question can be asked as to reputation for truth and veracity. If the witness’ reputation for chastity has not produced this result, then the jury should not be invited to make this deduction.”
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.