Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2026 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Iniguezgreen2 sentences2025Id. 2025See State v. Iniguez, 167 Wn.2d 273, 283 , 217 P.3d 768 (2009). | 2 | 4 |
State v. Iniguezgreen2 sentences2025See State v. Iniguez, 167 Wn.2d 273, 283 , 217 P.3d 768 (2009). 2025See State v. Iniguez, 167 Wn.2d 273, 283 , 217 P.3d 768 (2009). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Christensengreen2 sentences2009Barker, 407 U.S. at 522 ; see State v. Christensen, 75 Wn.2d 678, 688 , 453 P.2d 644 (1969) (noting that dismissal with prejudice was not the appropriate remedy where there was no constitutional speedy trial violation). 2009Barker, 407 U.S. at 522 ; see State v. Christensen, 75 Wn.2d 678, 688 , 453 P.2d 644 (1969) (noting that dismissal with prejudice was not the appropriate remedy where there was no constitutional speedy trial violation). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Whelchelgreen2 sentences2003See State v. Whelchel, 97 Wn. 2003See State v. Whelchel, 97 Wash.App. 813, 823 , 988 P.2d 20 (1999) review denied, 140 Wash.2d 1024 , 10 P.3d 405 (2000)(when no state speedy trial rule applies, a constitutional speedy trial analysis is indicated). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Olliviergreen2 sentences2015State v. 011ivier, 178 Wn. 2d 813, 827 , 312 P. 3d 1 ( 2013), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 72 ( 2014) ( holding that whether a constitutional speedy trial violation has occurred depends on the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the defendant' s assertion of his speedy trial right, and prejudice to the defendant). 2015State v. 011ivier, 178 Wn. 2d 813, 827 , 312 P. 3d 1 ( 2013), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 72 ( 2014) ( holding that whether a constitutional speedy trial violation has occurred depends on the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the defendant' s assertion of his speedy trial right, and prejudice to the defendant). | 1 | 6 |
State v. WHELECHELgreen2 sentences2003App. 813, 823 , 988 P.2d 20 (1999), review denied, 140 Wn.2d 1024 (2000) (when no state speedy trial rule applies, a constitutional speedy trial analysis is indicated). 2003See State v. Whelchel, 97 Wash.App. 813, 823 , 988 P.2d 20 (1999) review denied, 140 Wash.2d 1024 , 10 P.3d 405 (2000)(when no state speedy trial rule applies, a constitutional speedy trial analysis is indicated). | 1 | 2 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Swagertygreen1 sentence2025See Swagerty, 186 Wn.2d at 807 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Millergreen2 sentences2009See State v. Miller, 72 Wash. 154, 161-62 , 129 P. 1100 (1913) (discussing the differences between article I, section 22 and the early statute imposing the 60-day rule). [6] We have not addressed in any depth the appropriate analysis to determine what constitutes a constitutional speedy trial violation under article I, section 22 since Barker was released in 1972. 2009See State v. Miller, 72 Wash. 154, 161-62 , 129 P. 1100 (1913) (discussing the differences between article I, section 22 and the early statute imposing the 60-day rule). [6] We have not addressed in any depth the appropriate analysis to determine what constitutes a constitutional speedy trial violation under article I, section 22 since Barker was released in 1972. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences2024A constitutional speedy trial claim “necessitates a functional analysis of the right in the particular context of the case.” Barker, 407 U.S. at 522 . 2022To determine whether a constitutional speedy trial violation occurred, we employ the balancing test set out in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S. Ct. 2182 , 33 L. | 6 | 2009–2026 |
State v. Fladebo
green
2 sentences2017State v. Fladebo, 113 Wn.2d 388,393 , 779 P.2d 707 (1989); see also U.S. CONST. amend. 2017State v. Fladebo, 113 Wn.2d 388,393 , 779 P.2d 707 (1989); see also U.S. CONST. amend. | 3 | 2011–2017 |
Lowry v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R.
green
1 sentence2026Once a defendant makes this threshold showing, we then apply the balancing analysis outlined in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S. Ct. 33 L. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Smith
green
1 sentence2017State v. Smith, 165 Wn. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Rocha v. Crews
green
2 sentences2015State v. 011ivier, 178 Wn. 2d 813, 827 , 312 P. 3d 1 ( 2013), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 72 ( 2014) ( holding that whether a constitutional speedy trial violation has occurred depends on the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the defendant' s assertion of his speedy trial right, and prejudice to the defendant). 2015State v. 011ivier, 178 Wn. 2d 813, 827 , 312 P. 3d 1 ( 2013), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 72 ( 2014) ( holding that whether a constitutional speedy trial violation has occurred depends on the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the defendant' s assertion of his speedy trial right, and prejudice to the defendant). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Torres
green
1 sentence2014State v. Torres, 111 Wn. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.