Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 74 Wash. 2d 420 - State v. Forbes

74 Wash. 2d 420 - State v. Forbes’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
May 1982
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 73 Wash. 2d 616 - State v. Martin · 71 Wash. 2d 583 - State v. Piche · 39 Wash. 2d 675 - State v. Farmer · 60 Wash. 2d 883 - State v. Shannon · 69 Wash. 2d 64 - State Ex Rel. Woodhouse v. Dore

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

  1. “To assure the defendant of counsel’s best efforts then, the law must afford the attorney a wide latitude and flexibility in his choice of trial psychology and tactics. If counsel is to be stultified at trial by a post trial scrutiny of the myriad choices he must make in the course of a trial: whether to examine on a fact, whether and how much to cross-examine, whether to put some witnesses on the stand and leave others off —indeed, in some instances, whether to interview some witnesses before trial or leave them alone — he will lose the very freedom of action so essential to a skillful representation of the accused.”
    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.