52 Wash. App. 416 - State v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Grayson · 109 Wash. 2d 207 - State v. Dunaway · 106 Wash. 2d 514 - State v. Nordby · 106 Wash. 2d 525 - State v. Oxborrow · 106 Wash. 2d 547 - State v. Armstrong
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an exception for acts . . . that are designed to subvert or defraud the criminal justice process generally and the proportionality goals of the SRA, specifically, is consistent with the intent of the act.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“I. The defendant was purposefully deceptive to the court by lying about his true identity. II. The defendant's lack of truthfulness under oath and callous disregard of the criminal justice process, as evidenced by his attempt to manipulate it, is probative of his attitude toward society and likelihood of future transgressions. III. The aggravating sentencing factors set forth in RCW 9.94A-.390 Eure illustrative, not exclusive and the defendant's conduct is a substEuitial and compelling reason for an exceptional sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martinez“defendant's criminal history would be unaltered since his alleged crimes were misdemeanors and would not be counted in a future offender score. RCW 9.94A.030(8)(b).”
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.