Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 95 Wash. App. 277 - State v. Newbern

95 Wash. App. 277 - State v. Newbern’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably State v. Fisher (2009), State v. Coria (2002)

27 state decisions

1901999200020102020decided

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 North Carolina v. Alford · Frye v. United States · Allison v. United States · United States v. Dennis · 125 Wash. 2d 24 - State v. Russell

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the court, upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If a witness does not testify at trial about the incident, whether from lack of memory or another reason, there is no testimony to impeach. Tegland, § 256, at 310. See Kuhn, 24 F.2d at 913 (improper to impeach witness who fails to give testimony). But conversely, even if a witness cannot remember making a prior inconsistent statement, if the witness testifies at trial to an inconsistent story, the need for the jury to know that this witness may be unreliable remains compelling. See generally Hancock, 109 Wn.2d at 765. Here, Jones testified to an inconsistent story when she said the shooting had occurred by accident. Thus, the trial court did not err in allowing the State to use Jones’s [inconsistent pretrial] statement to impeach her trial testimony.[ 49 ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A party's failure to request a limiting instruction constitutes a waiver of that party's right to such an instruction and fails to preserve the claimed error for appeal.”
    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.