Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 78 Wash. App. 134 - State v. Quiros

78 Wash. App. 134 - State v. Quiros’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2012

15 state decisions

120199520002010decided

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 115 Wash. 2d 445 - State v. Pryor · 117 Wash. 2d 701 - State v. Barnes · 108 Wash. 2d 458 - State v. McAlpin · 117 Wash. 2d 156 - State v. Allert · 76 Wash. App. 174 - State v. Flake

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.

  1. “In determining any sentence, the trial court may rely on no more information than is admitted by the plea agreement, or admitted, acknowledged, or proved in a trial or at the time of sentencing. Acknowledgment includes not objecting to informa tion stated in the presentence reports. Where the defendant disputes material facts, the court must either not consider the fact or grant an evidentiary hearing on the point. The facts shall be deemed proved at the hearing by a preponderance of the evidence. Facts that establish the elements of a more serious crime or additional crimes may not be used to go outside the presumptive sentence range except upon stipulation or when specifically provided for in RCW 9.94A.390(2)(d), (e), (g), and (h).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “The defendant's failure to submit to evaluation and treatment for alcohol abuse, despite the sentencing orders entered following his convictions for Driving While Under the Influence, and his continued abuse of alcohol, which led to the commission of these crimes and the severe injury to three innocent victims, constitute aggravating factors.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the defendant's awareness of the substance abuse problem accompanied by `an unwillingness to take steps to cure the problem, that makes him more culpable when he again repeats the behavior than he would be if he had not had prior warnings and an opportunity to change his behavior.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.