56 Wash. App. 145 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 2024
12 state decisions
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 South Dakota v. Opperman · Illinois v. Lafayette · 106 Wash. 2d 144 - State v. Stroud · United States v. Vasey · 113 Wash. 2d 388 - State v. Fladebo
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This statute imposes upon an arresting officer a twofold duty when he does not have the warrant in his possession: (1) a duty to tell the arrestee that a warrant for his arrest exists; and (2) a duty to advise the arrestee that it will be shown to him as soon as possible after he is jailed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jordan“[A]ny officer making an arrest. . . shall, if the person arrested wishes to deposit bail, take such person directly and without delay. . . before an officer . . . authorized to take the recognizance . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“provide a defendant with notice of the charge and the amount of bail as soon as possible after arrest so that the defendant may avoid incarceration by posting bail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ross
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.