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.
16 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ashe v. Swenson
green
2 sentences2004“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003) (citing Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443 , 90 S. Ct. 1189 , 25 L. 2004“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003) (citing Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443 , 90 S. Ct. 1189 , 25 L. | 15 | 1997–2025 |
State v. Tili
green
2 sentences2025“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003). 2004“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003) (citing Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443 , 90 S. Ct. 1189 , 25 L. | 4 | 2004–2025 |
State v. Tili
green
2 sentences2025“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003). 2004“The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guaranty against double jeopardy.” State v. Tili, 148 Wn.2d 350, 360 , 60 P.3d 1192 (2003) (citing Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443 , 90 S. Ct. 1189 , 25 L. | 4 | 2004–2025 |
State v. Linton
green
2 sentences2005App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wn.2d at 391 ), review granted, 153 Wn.2d 1017 (2005). ¶19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. 2005State v. Linton, 122 Wash.App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wash.2d at 391 , 341 P.2d 481 ), review granted, 153 Wash.2d 1017 , 108 P.3d 1229 (2005). ¶ 19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Schoel
green
2 sentences2005App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wn.2d at 391 ), review granted, 153 Wn.2d 1017 (2005). ¶19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. 2005State v. Linton, 122 Wash.App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wash.2d at 391 , 341 P.2d 481 ), review granted, 153 Wash.2d 1017 , 108 P.3d 1229 (2005). ¶ 19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Linton
green
2 sentences2005App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wn.2d at 391 ), review granted, 153 Wn.2d 1017 (2005). ¶19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. 2005State v. Linton, 122 Wash.App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wash.2d at 391 , 341 P.2d 481 ), review granted, 153 Wash.2d 1017 , 108 P.3d 1229 (2005). ¶ 19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Overby v. City of Battle Ground
green
1 sentence2005State v. Linton, 122 Wash.App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wash.2d at 391 , 341 P.2d 481 ), review granted, 153 Wash.2d 1017 , 108 P.3d 1229 (2005). ¶ 19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Linton
green
1 sentence2005State v. Linton, 122 Wash.App. 73, 76 , 93 P.3d 183 (2004) (citing Schoel, 54 Wash.2d at 391 , 341 P.2d 481 ), review granted, 153 Wash.2d 1017 , 108 P.3d 1229 (2005). ¶ 19 The doctrine of collateral estoppel is embodied in the constitutional guaranty against double jeopardy. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
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.