Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 Wash. App. 232 - State v. Salinas

67 Wash. App. 232 - State v. Salinas’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 1993
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 114 Wash. 2d 828 - State v. Fjermestad

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) If a police commander or officer above the rank of first line supervisor has reasonable suspicion that the safety of the consenting party is in danger, law enforcement personnel may, for the sole purpose of protecting the safety of the consenting party, intercept, transmit, or record a private conversation or communication concerning the unlawful manufacture, delivery, sale, or possession with intent to manufacture, deliver, or sell, controlled substances . . ..”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) As part of a bona fide criminal investigation, the chief law enforcement officer of a law enforcement agency or his or her designee above the rank of first fine supervisor may authorize the interception, transmission, or recording of a conversation or communication by officers under the following circumstances: "(a) At least one party to the conversation or communication has consented to the interception, transmission, or recording; "(b) Probable cause exists to believe that the conversation or communication involves the unlawful manufacture, delivery, sale, or possession with intent to manufacture, deliver, or sell, controlled substances as defined in chapter 69.50 RCW, or legend drugs as defined in chapter 69.41 RCW, or imitation controlled substances as defined in chapter 69.52 RCW; and "(c) A written report has been completed as required by subsection (2) of this section.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"(a) At least one party to the conversation or communication has consented to the interception, transmission, or recording; "(b) Probable cause exists to believe that the conversation or communication involves the unlawful manufacture, delivery, sale, or possession with intent to manufacture, deliver, or sell, controlled substances as defined in chapter 69.50 RCW, or legend drugs as defined in chapter 69.41 RCW, or imitation controlled substances as defined in chapter 69.52 RCW; and "(c) A written report has been completed as required by subsection (2) of this section." RCW 9.73.230(1).”
    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.