8 Wash. 2d 573 - State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently July 2021
20 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 Brammer v. Lappenbusch · Strickland v. State · Miller v. Miller · State v. Quinlan · State v. Osborne
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there is a presumption against any sudden change in the character of a person who has reached the age of maturity.. . . The implication of the foregoing statement is that testimony of past character is deemed to have probative value in determining present character because an adult person is not likely to undergo any sudden change.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Johnson v. State“The rule applies to criminal prosecutions for rape and other crimes in which the age of the witness is a constituent element of the offense. [State v. Thomas, 8 Wn.2d 573, 575 , 113 P.2d 73 (1941)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the sources of the information of the impeaching witness must necessarily more or less extend back into the past and considerable latitude is allowed in regard to time .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Devincentz v. State
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.