86 Wash. 2d 51 - State v. Hess’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 106 Wash. 2d 772 - State v. Smith (1986), State v. Blank (1997)
2 district · 42 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 Rinaldi v. Yeager · Fuller v. Oregon · James v. Strange · 2 Cal. 3d 513 - In Re Ricky H. · 36 Wash. 2d 367 - State v. Goebel
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The requirement of repayment must not be mandatory; (2) Repayment may be imposed only upon convicted defendants; (3) Repayment may only be ordered if the defendant is or will be able to pay; (4) The financial resources of the defendant must be taken into consideration; (5) A repayment obligation may not be imposed if it appears there is no likelihood the defendant's indigency will end; (6) The convicted person must be permitted to petition the court for remission of the payment of costs or any unpaid portion thereof; (7) The convicted person cannot be held in contempt for failure to repay if the default was not attributable to an intentional refusal to obey the court order or a failure to make a good faith effort to make repayment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Underlying the Fuller decision is a concern that indigent defendants might be discouraged from utilizing court-appointed counsel where repayment for such services could later be required without regard to the defendant’s particular circumstances. Similarly, in [State v.] Eide [ 83 Wash.2d 676 , 521 P.2d 706 (1974)] we were concerned primarily with the ab sence of standards sufficient to protect the defendant against an arbitrary imposition of costs. That concern remains. We have no statute which sets forth guidelines for requiring the repayment of court-appointed attorney fees, and the condition placed upon defendant’s probation in this ease cannot stand, (emphasis supplied)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Likewise we are not presented and do not consider the question whether the court has inherent power to exercise discretion to consider appropriate factors and fashion conditions of probation which meet constitutional criteria.” —86 Wash.2d at 54, 541 P.2d at 1224 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rogers
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.