Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 P.3d 903 - State v. Torres

State v. Torres’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2006
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Hoffman · State v. Ford · 97 Wash. 2d 493 - State v. Grisby · 89 Wash. 2d 788 - State v. MacK · State v. Everybodytalksabout

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.

  1. “This is not to say that the State has no responsibility to reassign a vacationing deputy's cases to the next most available deputy, and to control the schedule of vacations in such a manner as to minimize the need to reassign cases. Such clearly is required and such clearly was done here. We emphasize that the State has an obligation to accommodate both responsibly scheduled vacations for its deputy prosecutors and a defendant's CrR 3.3 rights. We hold that when the State has responsibly managed its resources in terms of the available deputy prosecutors, courtrooms and judges, and also in terms of the responsible scheduling of prosecutor vacations, but due to unforeseen or unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the parties or the court, a criminal case cannot be tried on its set date or before the CrR 3.3 expiration date, the State may accommodate the planned vacation of the deputy prosecutor, so long as the case is reassigned in good faith to the next most available deputy prosecutor.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When speedy trial and consolidation considerations collide, the court must balance the competing interests.”
    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.