Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 73 P.3d 1011 - State v. Dolan

State v. Dolan’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

18 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Davis v. Alaska · Bibby v. United States · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · United States v. Abel

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.

  1. “[A] witness may not give, directly or by inference, an opinion on a defendant's guilt. [ State v. Madison, 53 Wash.App. 754, 760 , 770 P.2d 662 , review denied, 113 Wash.2d 1002 , 777 P.2d 1050 (1989).] To do so is to violate the defendant's constitutional right to a jury trial and invade the fact-finding province of the jury. [ State v. Demery, 144 Wash.2d 753, 759 , 30 P.3d 1278 (2001) (plurality opinion).]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Bias includes that which exists at the time of trial, for the very purpose of impeachment is to provide information that the jury can use, during deliberations, to test the witness's accuracy while the witness was testifying.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “State v. Guloy, 104 Wash.2d 412, 425 , 705 P.2d 1182 (1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1020 , 106 S.Ct. 1208 , 89 L.Ed.2d 321 (1986). We employ the”
    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.