81 Wash. 2d 111 - State v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably 120 Wash. 2d 334 - State v. McDougal (1992), 109 Wash. 2d 29 - State v. Stannard (1987)
31 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 79 Wash. 2d 51 - State v. Moore · 80 Wash. 2d 624 - State Department of Motor Vehicles v. McElwain · 79 Wash. 2d 500 - Connolly v. Department of Motor Vehicles · 78 Wash. 2d 771 - State v. Felix
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(5) The person tested may have a physician, or a qualified technician, chemist, registered nurse, or other qualified person of his own choosing administer a chemical test or tests in addition to any administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer. The failure or inability to obtain an additional test by a person shall not preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test or tests taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“Such officer shall inform the person of his right to refuse the test, and of his right to have additional tests administered by any qualified person of his choosing as provided in RCW 46.61.506.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]hat he may have his own tests made if he fears the accuracy or fairness of the test to be given by law enforcement officers.”
3 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.