88 Wash. App. 485 - State v. McCorkle’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
May 2009
most recently cited
57 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 105 Wash. 2d 175 - State v. Ammons · State v. Sanwick · 127 Wash. 2d 281 - State v. McCraw · 83 Wash. 2d 594 - State v. Taylor · 97 Wash. 2d 255 - State v. Danforth
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here a defendant specifically and timely objects that the evidence does not prove classification of prior out-of-state convictions used to calculate an offender score, the sentencing court should conduct an evidentiary hearing to allow the State to adduce additional evidence of classification. If the State then fails to prove the requisite felony classifications, the State will not have another opportunity to prove the classifications on remand following appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gill · State v. Gill“(1) Every person who shall without the permission of the owner or person entitled to the possession thereof intentionally take or drive away any automobile or motor vehicle, whether propelled by steam, electricity, or internal combustion engine, the property of another, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and every person voluntarily riding in or upon said automobile or motor vehicle with knowledge of the fact that the same was unlawfully taken shall be equally guilty with the person taking or driving said automobile or motor vehicle and shall be deemed guilty of taking a motor vehicle without permission.[ [13] ] (2) Taking a motor vehicle without permission is a class C felony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jackson“[i]n the normal case, where the disputed issues have been fully argued to the sentencing court, we would hold the State to the existing record, excise the unlawful portion of the sentence, and remand for resentencing without allowing further evidence to be adduced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lopez
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.