75 Wash. App. 899 - State v. King’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently April 2021
23 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 38 Cal. 3d 301 - People v. Castro · 101 Wash. 2d 566 - State v. Petrich · 110 Wash. 2d 403 - State v. Kitchen · 20 Cal. 3d 109 - People v. Rollo · United States v. Berardi
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness in a criminal or civil case, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during examination of the witness but only if the crime (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year under the law under which the witness was convicted, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs the prejudice to the party against whom the evidence is offered, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[sjimply because a defendant has committed a crime in the past does not mean the defendant will lie when testifying.” Jones, 101 Wn.2d at 119 . In addition to questioning the probative value of prior convictions, we also described such evidence as”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Calegar“we explicitly adhere to the Jones rationale and require the trial court to articulate how the specific nature of the prior felony makes it one of the few offenses not involving dishonesty or false statement that nevertheless has probative value.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Hardy
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.