State v. Gamble’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
April 2012
most recently cited
18 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Johnson v. United States · Griffith v. Kentucky · 94 Wash. 2d 216 - State v. Green · 90 Wash. 2d 443 - State v. Workman · Wright v. State
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he dispositive issue should not be whether the jury was instructed on the lesser included offense, but rather whether the jury necessarily found each element of the lesser included offense in reaching its verdict on the crime charged.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“applies to all cases pending direct review at the time the rule is announced.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In convicting Gamble of second degree felony murder as charged, the jury necessarily found that (1) Gamble intentionally assaulted Carroll and thereby (2) recklessly inflicted substantial bodily harm that (3) caused Carroll's death. If proof of these elements necessarily establishes guilt of another lesser included offense, Gamble's case may properly be remanded for resentencing on that lesser included crime. We apply the lesser included offense analysis to the offenses as charged and prosecuted, rather than as they broadly appear in statute. .... Although a person may commit the crime of first degree manslaughter without intentionally assaulting his victim, he may not do so without recklessly inflicting substantial bodily harm (element 2) causing victim's death (element 3). Thus, the jury necessarily found that Gamble committed all elements of first degree manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt when it found that he committed second degree felony murder by second degree assault in violation of RCW 9A.32.050(1)(b) and RCW 9A.36.021(1)(a) as charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gamble · State v. Hughes
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.