6 Wash. 2d 696 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2006 · most notably Ford v. Wainwright (1986), Solesbee v. Balkcom (1950)
3 federal appellate · 31 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 Commonwealth v. Russ · State v. Gaines · Commonwealth v. Retkovitz · State v. Spadoni · State v. Churchill
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“his mind was diseased to such an extent that he was unable to perceive the moral qualities of the act with which he is charged, and was unable to tell right from wrong with reference to the particular act charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The general rule is well established that proof of the commission of a separate and distinct crime will not be admitted for the purpose of aiding the conviction of defendant for the crime charged. There are exceptions, however, to this general rule, as where the testimony shows a connection between the transaction under investigation and some other transaction, and where they are so interwoven that the omission of the testimony in relation to the other crime would detract something from the testimony which the state would have a right to introduce as tending to show the commission of the crime charged by the defendant ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In making its case, the state was entitled to introduce any evidence which was competent, relevant, and material to the issue to be determined by the jury. That a portion of the evidence so offered might incidentally tend to show that appellant had been guilty of some other and separate offense, is unimportant if the evidence tended to support the state’s contention in the case being tried, and was admissible under the general rules of evidence. State v. Thuna, 59 Wash. 689 , 109 Pac. 331 , 111 Pac. 768 ; State v. Macleod, 78 Wash. 175 , 138 Pac. 648 .”
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.