State v. Noel’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 2020
5 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 121 Wash. 2d 205 - Allied Daily Newspapers v. Eikenberry · 122 Wash. 2d 131 - Scott v. Department of Social & Health Services · 57 Wash. App. 861 - State v. Gilkinson · 99 Wash. App. 400 - State v. Breazeale · State v. Noel
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Subject to the provisions of RCW 4.24 and CR 26(j), on motion of any interested person in a criminal case or juvenile proceeding, or on the court’s own motion, and after a hearing, the court may order the files and records in the proceeding, or any part thereof, to be sealed if the court finds that such action is expressly permitted by statute or that there are compelling circumstances requiring such action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“No substantive rights of either the State, as prosecutor, or the defendant are affected. The ability of the State to use sealed convictions in future criminal proceedings is not impinged, as it is when records are destroyed. The sole effect of sealing is on the public’s right of access to the files.”
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.