89 Wash. App. 774 - State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
February 2004
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 106 Wash. 2d 54 - State v. Gunwall · 119 Wash. 2d 685 - State v. Reding · 81 Wash. App. 249 - State v. Nelson
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Reding specifically held that RCW 46.64.015 and RCW 10.31.100(3) authorize custodial arrest for reckless driving. The court here found Mr. Thomas committed reckless driving in front of the police officers and their stop was not a pretext. Thus, the officers had probable cause to make a custodial arrest of Mr. Thomas. The usual practice of Spokane police officers is to cite and release reckless drivers, but the officers decided to make a custodial arrest of Mr. Thomas because they believed he was gang affiliated. The State contends the court should not have looked at the reason the officers made the custodial arrest because the officers had probable cause to make the custodial arrest without the erroneous information. We agree. Reding states: “The statutes, RCW 46.64.015 and RCW 10.31.100 do not require some additional factor to be present for police to have authority to perform a custodial arrest for reckless driving.” Whether Mr. Thomas was gang affiliated or not, the officers had the authority to make a custodial arrest.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Whenever any person is arrested for any violation of the traffic laws or regulations which is punishable as a misdemeanor or by imposition of a fine, the arresting officer may serve upon him or her a traffic citation and notice to appear in court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“reasons which justify a search incident to arrestto protect the officer and preserve possible evidencecontinue to exist whether or not the defendant is going to be released without an arrest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. O'NEILL
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.