74 Wash. App. 126 - State v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently January 2014
17 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 Franks v. Delaware · 95 Wash. 2d 898 - State v. Seagull · 96 Wash. 2d 215 - State v. Williams · 103 Wash. 2d 361 - State v. Cord · 91 Wash. 2d 704 - Daughtry v. Jet Aeration Co.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The notice of appeal clearly states what is intended, the brief was sufficient for Olson to respond, and he has responded. Olson has not been prejudiced and the review process has not been significantly impeded by any technical inadequacy in the State’s opening brief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he purpose of a notice of appeal is to notify the adverse party that an appeal is intended.”
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.