Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 Wash. App. 645 - State v. Warren

55 Wash. App. 645 - State v. Warren’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
3
states following
April 2010
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2010

19 state decisions

801989199020002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Dutton v. Evans · Bibby v. United States · 104 Wash. 2d 412 - State v. Guloy · 110 Wash. 2d 682 - State v. Scott

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. “(1) the statement contains no express assertion about past fact, (2) cross examination could not show the declarant's lack of knowledge, (3) the possibility of the declarant's faulty recollection is remote, and (4) the circumstances surrounding the statement (in that case spontaneous and against interest) are such that there is no reason to suppose the declarant misrepresented defendant's involvement.[ 2 ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In order to prevail on an ineffective assistance claim based on counsel’s failure to seek severance, the defendant must demonstrate both that the motion should have been granted and “a reasonable probability” that, but for counsel’s deficient performance, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`(1) the strength of the State's evidence on each count; (2) the clarity of the defenses as to each count; (3) court instructions to the jury to consider each count separately; and (4) the admissibility of evidence of the other charges even if not joined for trial.'”
    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.