52 Wash. App. 176 - State v. Toennis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We agree with the court in Mulder that a qualified physician may testify that within reasonable probabilities, a particular injury or group of injuries to a child is not accidental or is not consistent with the defendant's explanation, but is instead consistent with physical abuse by a person of mature strength. Mulder, 29 Wash.App. at 515 , 629 P.2d 462 . Although it has been argued that this testimony usurps the function of the jury, we disagree. The jury must still decide whether the particular injury in question was caused by the defendant. Mulder, 29 Wash.App. at 516 , 629 P.2d 462 . ... Here, the trial court properly ruled that if the proper foundation was established, the doctor could testify concerning the battered child syndrome to explain the continuing nature of the abuse and to rebut any inference of accidental injury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Norlin

2. “the State must prove both prior acts, and the defendant's connection to these acts, by a preponderance of the evidence”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Norlin