44 Wash. App. 519 - State v. Dold’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2008
14 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 Franks v. Delaware · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · United States v. Jacobsen · Burdeau v. McDowell
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Constitutional guaranties against unreasonable searches and seizures protect only against governmental actions and do not require the application of the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained from private citizens acting on their own initiative. [Numerous citations omitted.] The history and origins of both the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution and article 1, section 7, of the Washington State Constitution clearly show they were intended as a restraint upon sovereign authority; in the absence of state action, they have no application regardless of the scope of protection which would otherwise be afforded under either provision. [Citations omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he burden is on the defendant to present evidence that indicates collusion between the citizen informant and the police”). 18 United States v. Lyons, 992 F.2d 1029, 1031 (10th Cir. 1993) (defendant must prove his standing to challenge a search); see also Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165, 173 , 89 S. Ct. 961 , 22 L. Ed 2d 176 (1969) (quoting Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 261 , 80 S. Ct. 725 , 4 L. Ed. 2d 697 (1960) (one who brings a motion to suppress must allege and establish”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“No per se rule can be formulated to determine if a private citizen is acting as an agent of governmental authorities.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Swenson
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.