56 Wash. App. 51 - State v. Gettman’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2015
8 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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Oyler v. Boles · Cannon v. United States · Basic Inc. v. Levinson · 98 Wash. 2d 484 - State v. McCullum
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a court of limited jurisdiction a person charged with a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor may petition the court to be considered for a deferred prosecution program .... A person charged with a traffic infraction, misdemeanor, or gross misdemeanor under Title 46 RCW shall not be eligible for a deferred prosecution program unless the court makes specific findings pursuant to RCW 10.05.020. Such person shall not be eligible for a deferred prosecution program more than once in any five-year period. Separate offenses committed more than seven days apart may not be consolidated in a single program.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The legislature further finds that the deferred prosecution statutes require clarification. The purpose of sections 4 through 19 of this act is to provide specific standards and procedures for judges and prosecutors to use in carrying out the original intent of the deferred prosecution statutes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“And in holding that “ ‘may not’ is dearly not permissive in nature,” a panel of the Court of Appeals of Washington cogently noted that “[h]ad the Legislature intended such, it could have simply omitted the word ‘not.’ ””
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.