95 Wash. 2d 931 - State v. Rotunno’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably 101 Wash. 2d 745 - State v. Laureano (1984), 97 Wash. 2d 818 - In Re the Personal Restraint of Hagler (1982)
23 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 88 Wash. 2d 221 - State v. Wanrow · 91 Wash. 2d 487 - In Re the Welfare of Wilson · 87 Wash. 2d 129 - State v. Young · 94 Wash. 2d 569 - State v. Savage · 27 Wash. App. 901 - State v. Rotunno
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.
“A person who is present at the scene and ready to assist by his or her presence is aiding in the commission of the crime. However, more than mere presence and knowledge of the criminal activity of another must be shown to establish that a person is an accomplice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Robinson · State v. Trout“`in no way affected the final outcome of the case'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“" (a) Responsibility of Court. It shall be the responsibility of the court to insure to each person charged with crime a trial in accordance with the provisions of this rule. "(b) Time Limits. "(1) The time limits set forth in subsections (b)(2) and (b)(3) shall commence to rim from the date: (a) of the order binding the defendant over to the superior court following a preliminary hearing pursuant to JCrR 2.03 or (b) of the tenth day following the defendant's arrest in the event a preliminary hearing is not held or the charge is initially filed in the superior court. "(2) A defendant unable to obtain pretrial release from custody shall be brought to trial within 60 days of the applicable event set forth in subsection (b)(1). ” (3) A defendant who is released from custody shall be brought to trial within 90 days of the applicable event set forth in subsection (b)(1). ”(d) Setting of Trial Date; Notice to Parties. " (1) The court shall, within 10 days of the defendant's arraignment in superior court, set a date for trial which is within the time limits prescribed by this rule, and notify all parties and their counsel of the date set. The notice shall set forth the date of the defendant's arraignment in court on the charge to be tried and the number of days which will elapse before the trial date. A party who objects to the date set upon the ground that it is not within the time limits prescribed by this rule must, within 10 days of receiving the notice from the court, move that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.