83 Wash. 2d 541 - State v. Odom’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 88 Wash. 2d 337 - State v. Roberts (1977), 89 Wash. 2d 38 - State v. Blight (1977)
43 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Leary v. United States · Schneble v. Florida · Turner v. United States · United States v. Johnson
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Being armed prima facie evidence of intent. In the trial of a person for committing or attempting to commit a crime of violence, the fact that he was armed with a pistol and had no license to’ carry the same shall be prima facie evidence of his intention to commit said crime of violence.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"In Wilbur v. Mullaney, 473 F.2d 943, 948 (1st Cir. 1973), the court struck down a presumption that malice is presumed from an intentional killing, noting that while a presumption `might, conceivably, be justified if based upon a fact which, if found beyond a reasonable doubt, also compels the inference beyond a reasonable doubt . . . no one could suggest such in this case.' "The application by the United States Supreme Court of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard as an alternative in Leary and Turner, and its subsequent application in Johnson and Wilbur, are persuasive to us that this is the appropriate standard to apply in this case." 520 P.2d at 156 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the jury should be . . . instructed that the presumption is not binding upon the jury even though the fact to be presumed is unrefuted by the defendant, and that the state must still sustain the burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, it should be made clear that the statutory presumption permits, but in no way directs, the jury to convict the accused, and must be considered by the jury in the light of the presumption of innocence which arises upon a plea of not guilty . . .”
1 later decision 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.