80 Wash. 2d 196 - State v. Estill’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently November 2011
18 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 Chapman v. State of California · Leary v. United States · Tot v. United States · United States v. Gainey · Greenwald v. Maryland
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, we conclude that the presumption established by RCW 9.26A.030 is a rebuttable one. It permits, but does not require, the trier of fact to find the presumed fact given the existence of the proven fact. The validity of such a presumption depends upon whether there is a rational connection between the fact which is proven and the fact which is presumed from the proven fact. [Citations omitted.] The required rational connection does not exist unless it is possible to say with substantial assurance that the presumed fact is more likely than not to flow from the proven fact on which it is made to depend. Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 , 23 L. Ed. 2d 57 , 89 S. Ct. 1532 (1969). We are convinced that under the Leary test the challenged presumption is valid and constitutional.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Davis“It is the rule in this state that statements by the prosecution or defense to the jury upon the law must be confined to the law as set forth in the instructions of the court. State v. Ellsworth, 40 Wn.2d 375 , 242 P.2d 1019 (1952); State v. Brown, 35 Wn.2d 379 , 213 P.2d 305 (1949).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When a person not an issuer or agent thereof has in his possession or under his control credit cards or identification cards issued in the names of two or more other persons he is presumed to have violated subsections (1) or (2) of this section.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Davis
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.