5 Wash. 2d 1 - State v. Furth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

54 state decisions

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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"It is unnecessary to cite authority in support of the statement that the word `inviolate,' as used in the above-quoted constitutional provision, means freedom from substantial impairment. The question whether the legislature may provide for waiving of the jury in criminal cases is not before us. Neither are we confronted by the question whether a defendant in a criminal case may waive trial by jury. The word `inviolate,' as employed in the above-quoted section, does not prohibit modification of the details of administration which does not affect enjoyment of the right of trial by jury, a right some times figuratively designated as `the jewel of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence.' "Under the above-quoted section of our constitution the courts cannot trench on the province of the jury upon questions of fact. It is the function of the jury — not the court — to settle disputed issues of fact. The jury does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused of the previous crimes charged. The issues of fact were whether there were previous convictions and whether appellant was the subject of those convictions. On a charge of a second or subsequent offense, the question of a prior conviction is an issue of fact to be determined by the jury." State v. Furth, 5 Wash.2d 1 , 104 P.2d 925 .”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Armstrong · 150 Wash. 2d 135 - State v. Smith

2. ““1. Every person convicted in this state of any crime of which fraud or intent to defraud is an element, or of petit larceny, or of any felony, who shall previously have been twice convicted, whether in this state or elsewhere, of any crime which under the laws of the situs of the crime or of this state would amount to a felony, or who shall previously have been three times convicted, whether in this state or elsewhere, of petit larceny, or of 'any misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor of which fraud or intent to defraud is an element, shall be adjudged to be an habitual criminal and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than 10 years. “2. Every person convicted in this state of any crime of which fraud or intent to defraud is an element, or of petit larceny, or of any felony, who shall previously have been three times convicted, whether in this state or elsewhere, of any crime which under the laws of the situs of the crime or of this state would amount to a felony, or who shall previously have been five times convicted, whether in this state or elsewhere, of petit larceny, or of any misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor of which fraud or intent to defraud is an element, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life. “3. In proceedings under this section, each previous conviction shall be alleged in the accusatory pleading charging the primary offense, but no such conviction may be alluded to on trial of the primary offense, nor may any all”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 86 Wash. 2d 200 - State v. Starrish · Howard v. State

3. “Where previous convictions are charged in an information for the purpose of enhancing the punishment of the defendant, such convictions must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, since the fact of the prior convictions is to be taken as an essential element of the offense charged, at least to the extent of aggravating it and authorizing an increased punishment.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 150 Wash. 2d 135 - State v. Smith · State v. Smith