Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 Wash. 2d 727 - State v. Weekly

41 Wash. 2d 727 - State v. Weekly’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
4
states following
January 2008
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 2008

3 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

70195219601970198019902000decided

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 Kercheval v. United States · State v. Bringgold · State v. Smith · Commonwealth v. Crapo · Jones 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A defendant may wish to plead guilty for any one of several reasons having nothing to do with his guilt. He may wish to spare his family the unfavorable publicity attendant upon a trial. He may, for private reasons, prefer to plead guilty rather than have his past paraded before the world. He may fear that a trial might result in a relative or friend being charged as an accessory or in the defendant’s being charged with other crimes. These and other cogent reasons may impel a defendant who does not believe he is guilty to plead guilty and waive a public trial. Whatever his motive, this is his privilege whether he be guilty or not guilty. When his plea of guilty is withdrawn, it is wiped out and becomes a nullity for all purposes. 252 P. 2d at 249 (Donworth, J., dissenting ). .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “While it is impossible to analyze the processes of the human mind, we cannot say that the jury was not impressed with the statement that defendant had previously pleaded guilty. No matter how great an effort a juror might make not to let it prejudice him, the statement was of such a nature that it could not be eradicated from the average juror’s mind by instruction of the judge. 284 N. W. at 927 .”
    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.