59 Wash. App. 461 - State v. Lessley’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 109 Wash. 2d 207 - State v. Dunaway · 109 Wash. 2d 947 - Allingham v. City of Seattle · 113 Wash. 2d 413 - Southcenter Joint Venture v. National Democratic Policy Committee · 96 Wash. 2d 183 - In Re the Marriage of Little · 110 Wash. 2d 892 - In Re Eaton
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.
“Crimes which he objectively intended to commit [in the Thomas residence] included the property damage caused when he broke in, the assault against Mr. Thomas, and the assaults against Mrs. Thomas and his former girl friend, Dorothy Olson. His subjective intent is irrelevant, and we would only be speculating to assume that that subjective intent was to kidnap and [assault] his former girl friend. He may initially only have intended to confront her.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[W]henever a person is to be sentenced for two or more current offenses, the sentence range for each current offense shall be determined by using all other current and prior convictions as if they were prior convictions for the purpose of the offender score: Provided, That if the court enters a finding that some or all of the current offenses encompass the same criminal conduct then those current offenses shall be counted as one crime. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Every person who, in the commission of a burglary shall commit any other crime, may be punished therefor as well as for the burglary, and may be prosecuted for each crime separately.”
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.