State v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2010 · most notably State v. Kindsvogel (2003), State v. Lee (1997)
25 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 120 Wash. 2d 585 - State v. Greenwood · 87 Wash. 2d 870 - State v. Striker · Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc. · 113 Wash. 2d 388 - State v. Fladebo · 90 Wash. 2d 423 - State v. Peterson
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal incident’ from the time the defendant is held to answer any charge with respect to that conduct or episode.” We said in Harris: The policy behind the Peterson rule is similar to the policy behind mandatory joinder. Joinder principles are designed to protect defendants from”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"prosecutors from harassing a defendant by bringing successive charges over a long span of time even though all charges stem from the same criminal episode. When multiple charges stem from the same criminal conduct or criminal episode, the State must prosecute all related charges within the speedy trial time limits."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lee · State v. Kindsvogel“The ABA standard adopted by Peterson has been cited as controlling law in many subsequent cases. See, e.g., State v. Fladebo, 113 Wash.2d 388, 392 , 779 P.2d 707 (1989); State v. Anderson, 94 Wash.2d 176, 183 , 616 P.2d 612 (1980); State v. Austin, 59 Wash.App. 186, 201 , 796 P.2d 746 (1990); State v. Bradley, 38 Wash.App. 597, 599 , 687 P.2d 856 , review denied, 102 Wash.2d 1024 (1984). Even though the ABA standard adopted in Peterson cannot be found in CrR 3.3, standard 12-2.2 has been incorporated into the rules through Peterson 's adoption of the standard and Fladebo 's continued adherence to it. CrR 1.1 ("These rules ... shall be interpreted and supplemented in light of the common law and the decisional law of this state." (emphasis added)); see also State v. Greenwood, 120 Wash.2d 585, 595 , 845 P.2d 971 (1993).”
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.