Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 79 Wash. 2d 326 - State v. Parker

79 Wash. 2d 326 - State v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
3
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably 83 Wash. 2d 424 - State v. Gluck (1974), 102 Wash. 2d 277 - State v. Dictado (1984)

39 state decisions

18019711980199020002010decided

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 Brinegar v. United States · Chambers v. Maroney · Malloy v. Hogan · Allen v. United States · Hoffman v. United States

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

  1. ““But the asserted hazard of self-incrimination must appear to be genuine; if fanciful or illusory, the claim of immunity should be rejected as insufficient to overcome the correlative duty to the court and litigants to testify to the truth. This means that the power to decide whether the hazards of self-incrimination are genuine and not merely illusory, speculative, contrived or false, must rest with the trial court before whom the witness is called to give evidence. The power to decide whether the witness shall be immune from answering certain questions put to him on the ground that the answers will incriminate him is thus vested in the trial court to be exercised in its sound discretion under all of the circumstances then present. * * * [citing authorities].””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[pjrobable cause for an arrest without a warrant arises from a belief based upon facts and circumstances within the knowledge of the arresting officer that would persuade a cautious but disinterested person to believe the arrested person has committed a crime. The officer need not have knowledge or evidence sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, for in this area the law is concerned with probabilities arising from the facts and considerations of everyday life on which prudent men, not legal technicians, act.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”
    2 later decisions 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.