67 Wash. App. 486 - State v. Mead’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably 69 Wash. App. 189 - State v. Johnson (1993), State v. Woods (1998)
25 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 94 Wash. 2d 216 - State v. Green · 116 Wash. 2d 917 - State v. Davison · 36 Wash. App. 428 - State v. Mark · 38 Wash. App. 135 - State v. Hartwell · 30 Wash. App. 653 - State v. Rogers
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]tatutes authorizing restitution should not be given `an overly technical construction which would permit the defendant to escape from just punishment.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The size of [a restitution] award is within the court's discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Griffith“abuse its discretion by ordering restitution in an amount more than the statutory upper limit for the crime of conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Griffith
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.