Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 50 Wash. 2d 740 - State v. Collins

50 Wash. 2d 740 - State v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
8
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 63 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably State v. Lucas (1959), Wright v. United States (1957)

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 63 state decisions

26019571960197019801990200020102020decided

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 State v. Pike · People v. Maughs · People v. Jelke · State v. White · State v. Jones

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

  1. ““. . . any and all conduct of the person is admissible in evidence. There is no restriction as to the kind of conduct. There can be none; for if a specific act does not indicate insanity it may indicate sanity.” 2 Wigmore on Evidence (3d ed.) 9, § 228, quoted in State v. Odell (1951), 38 Wn. (2d) 4, 20, 227 P. (2d) 710 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]o establish premeditation, an intent to kill any specific person need not be proved; an intent to kill any person who may be at a certain place or who may attempt to do a certain thing is sufficient. State v. Baker (1928), 150 Wash. 82 , 272 Pac. 80 ; Williams v. Commonwealth (1920), 128 Va. 698 , 104 S. E. 853 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Is the mind of the accused so diseased or affected at the time of the commission of the act charged that he is unable to perceive the moral qualities of the act with which , he is charged and is unable to tell right from wrong with reference to the particular acts charged.”
    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.