73 Wash. 2d 936 - State v. Barnhart’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2007
15 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · 43 Wash. 2d 47 - State v. Thorne · 61 Wash. 2d 165 - State v. Moore · 47 Wash. 2d 593 - State v. Biondic · 73 Wash. 2d 898 - State v. Marten
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Another error is directed against the admission of a statement made by appellant to his wife, over the sheriffs telephone, in the presence of the sheriffs secretary. There was no testimony that the appellant objected to talking to his wife in the presence of the secretary. He saw her sitting across the desk from him when the telephone connection had been made. A statement in the presence of a third person, by a husband to his wife, loses its privileged character. If the communication is heard by a third person, even if an eavesdropper, the third person may testify to it, since the privilege protects only successful confidences. (citation omitted) Consequently, the statement made, as related by the sheriffs secretary, was properly admissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Summerlin
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.