63 Wash. App. 466 - State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 109 Wash. 2d 29 - State v. Stannard · 117 Wash. 2d 292 - Matter of Personal Restraint of Long · 56 Wash. App. 853 - In Re the Personal Restraint of Caley · 55 Wash. App. 803 - State v. Kern · 50 Wash. App. 228 - State v. Curwood
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“routine delays in sentencing and are sentenced at the same hearing.” Moore , at 470-71. Here, this exception does not apply because there is no evidence that Smith evaded any sentencing date. Indeed, Smith’s case is exactly the one that Moore opined was not covered by subsection (3), one where multiple independent charges were sentenced in the same hearing without any fault on the defendant in manipulating sentencing dates. 7 In this case, the sentencing court indicated that it was not imposing an exceptional sentence. The following colloquy occurred during the sentencing hearing:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“prevented [the] sentences from being entered when they normally would have been.” Moore , at 470. Division One opined that concurrent sentences would essentially”
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.