6 Wash. App. 607 - State v. Escue’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 1998
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 43 Wash. 2d 358 - State v. Stacy · 40 Wash. 2d 734 - State v. Lane · State v. Kincaid · 29 Wash. 2d 182 - State v. Hardamon · State v. Neadeau
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.
“Proof of venue is necessary in a criminal prosecution, but it is not an element of the crime. Neither is it a question of jurisdiction. It is a right which can be waived, and proof of venue is waived if it is not challenged. Not until the verdict was in and the trial concluded did appellant Escue challenge the sufficiency of the state's proof of venue. A failure to challenge the state's proof of venue at some point during the trial waives any objection to venue. This question was first presented in appellant's post-trial motion for arrest of judgment, which comes too late.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hickman · State v. Hickman“It is first claimed that the venue was not sufficiently proven. The trial was being had in Snohomish county, and there was evidence that the offense was committed at Pinehurst in that county. The question was not raised until after verdict and upon motion for a new trial. To now hold, when no substantial right of the appellant has been invaded, that the venue was not sufficiently proven seems to us would be too technical.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hickman · State v. Hickman“Due process and fair play regarding criminal defendants do not require a criminal trial to be a game of chance with all of the odds heavily weighted in favor of the defendant.... It seems fairly obvious that the ultimate in a criminal trial should be the ascertainment of the truth; that is, whether the accused is innocent and should be set free, or whether the accused is guilty and should be incarcerated for the protection of society. Again, it should not be a matter of luck or perhaps misadventure of one of the contestants during the course of a trial; nor should the outcome depend substantially upon the skill or luck of the attorney representing one side of the controversy. Escue, 6 Wash.App. at 608 , 495 P.2d 351 (quoting State v. Stacy, 43 Wash.2d 358, 367 , 261 P.2d 400, 405 (1953)). Hickman's ambush trial tactics should not be condoned by this Court. I would affirm the Court of Appeals and Hickman's conviction for insurance fraud.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hickman
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.