41 Wash. App. 802 - State v. Bryce’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 48 Wash. 2d 545 - In RE OLSEN v. Delmore · 30 Wash. App. 119 - State v. Eppens · 33 Wash. App. 428 - State v. Gosser · 94 Wash. 2d 721 - State v. Sass · 39 Wash. 2d 258 - State v. Olds
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ll offenses defined as larcenies outside of this title shall be treated as thefts as provided in this title.” RCW 9A.56.100. As the history of judicial interpretation of this sentence shows, the precise legislative intent behind the phrase”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Thus, the language of RCW 74.08.331 does not completely define all of the elements of the offense. It merely states one element — the methods in which this particular type of theft regarding public assistance entitlement can be committed. The second element of this theft crime is the amount of overpayment of public assistance. This element is essential. It identifies the offense and must be charged. Because the amount of overpayment of public assistance is an element of this theft crime, we agree with the trial court that since the information did not allege any amount unlawfully obtained, it stated only theft in the third degree, a gross misdemeanor[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“during a time intervening between January 11, 1978, through March 1, 1979, by means of a willful false statement or representation or impersonation did feloniously obtain and attempt to obtain and aid and abet to obtain from the Department of Public Assistance (Department of Social and Health Services for the State of Washington) to-wit: warrants and lawful money of the United States to which either defendant was not entitled or which were greater than either defendant was justly entitled to; Contrary to RCW 74.08.331, and against the peace and dignity of the state of Washington.”
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.