State v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2024
15 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 117 Wash. 2d 93 - State v. Kjorsvik · 125 Wash. 2d 782 - State v. Vangerpen · 113 Wash. 2d 679 - State v. Leach · 13 Wash. 2d 485 - Peasley v. Puget Sound Tug & Barge Co. · 118 Wash. 2d 151 - State v. Hopper
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The charging document in this case contained language indicating intentional conduct. The complaint alleged that [Taylor] committed assault ... by "pushing, kicking and punching the victim in the face." Under either the strict standard of construction or the liberal standard of construction, the words of a charging document are viewed as a whole and construed according to common sense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The two distinct standards of review encourage prosecuting attorneys to file sufficient complaints, and also encourage defendants to make timely challenges to defective charging documents to discourage `sandbagging.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Borrero“[t]he charging document need not state the statutory elements of the offense in the precise language employed in the statute, but may `use words conveying the same meaning and import as the statutory language.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Borrero
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.