66 Wash. App. 791 - State v. Landrum’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably State v. JP (2003), State v. J.P. (2003)
40 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 North Carolina v. Alford · 101 Wash. 2d 566 - State v. Petrich · 114 Wash. 2d 828 - State v. Fjermestad · 110 Wash. 2d 793 - In Re the Personal Restraint of King · 109 Wash. 2d 282 - Chelan County Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n v. County of Chelan
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Restitution” means financial reimbursement by the offender to the victim, and shall be limited to easily ascertainable damages for injury to or loss of property, actual expenses incurred for medical treatment for physical injury to persons, lost wages resulting from physical injury, and costs of the victim’s counseling reasonably related to the offense if the offense is a sex offense. Restitution shall not include reimbursement for damages for mental anguish, pain and suffering, or other intangible losses. Nothing in this chapter shall limit or replace civil remedies or defenses available to the victim or offender . . ..”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]n its dispositional order, the court shall require the respondent to make restitution to any persons who have suffered loss or damage as a result of the offense committed by the respondent.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“In determining whether a causal connection exists, we look to the underlying facts of the charged offense, not the name of the crime to which the defendant entered a plea.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hiett · State v. KEIGAN C.
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.