46 Wash. App. 882 - State v. Day’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently November 2001
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 103 Wash. 2d 165 - State v. Ryan · 87 Wash. 2d 870 - State v. Striker · 107 Wash. 2d 59 - State v. Pacheco · 99 Wash. 2d 180 - State v. Frazier · 94 Wash. 2d 208 - State v. Edwards
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“personnel of the court, the prosecutor's office and the police or sheriff's office must be treated as one entity when determining if there was knowledge of the defendant's whereabouts.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[1] for the month of March 1998. Chandler did not appear in court on that date, however, because he had not been served with notice to appear in court on that date. [2] Consequently, the trial court rescheduled Chandler's arraignment for April 15, 1998, the next regularly scheduled day that juvenile court matters would be heard in Skamania County. Chandler, who was not in custody or subject to conditions of release, appeared on April 15 with his attorney and entered a plea of”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Chandler“a prompt arraignment means an available juvenile defendant [who is not detained or subject to conditions of release after arrest] must be arraigned within 14 days after the information is filed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Chandler
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.