Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 Wash. App. 943 - State v. Heiskell

77 Wash. App. 943 - State v. Heiskell’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
November 2008
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 119 Wash. 2d 178 - Kadoranian v. Bellingham Police Department · 97 Wash. 2d 118 - Human Rights Commission v. Cheney School District No. 30 · 117 Wash. 2d 493 - State v. CSG Job Center · 91 Wash. 2d 197 - Hart v. Peoples National Bank · 75 Wash. App. 151 - State v. Acheson

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

  1. “(3) Any person having a duty to register under RCW 9A.44.130 may petition the superior court to be relieved of that duty . . . .The court shall consider the nature of the registrable offense committed, and the criminal and relevant noncriminal behavior of the petitioner both before and after conviction, and may consider other factors. Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, the court may relieve the petitioner of the duty to register only if the petitioner shows, with clear and convincing evidence, that future registration of the petitioner will not serve the purposes of RCW 9A.44.130 . . . . (4) An offender having a duty to register under RCW 9A.44.130 for a sex offense committed when the offender was a juvenile may petition the superior court to be relieved of that duty .... The court may relieve the petitioner of the duty to register for a sex offense that was committed while the petitioner was fifteen years of age or older only if the petitioner shows, with clear and convincing evidence, that future registration of the petitioner will not serve the purposes of RCW 9A.44.130 .... The court may relieve the petitioner of the duty to register for a sex offense that was committed while the petitioner was under the age of fifteen if the petitioner (a) has not been adjudicated of any additional sex offenses during the twenty-four months following the adjudication for the sex offense giving rise to the duty to register, and (b) the petitioner proves by a preponderan”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “On the one hand, it might mean that a juvenile can be relieved of his duty to register either (a) within 2 years, using a clear and convincing standard, or (b) after 2 years, using a preponderance standard. On the other hand, it might mean that a juvenile cannot be relieved of his duty to register before 2 years have expired, although he can be relieved after two years, using a preponderance standard.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Any person having a duty to register under RCW 9A.44.130 may petition the superior court to be relieved of that duty .... Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, the court may relieve the petitioner of the duty to register only if the petitioner shows, with clear and convincing evidence, that future registration of the petitioner will not serve the purposes of RCW 9A.44.130 ....”
    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.