15 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Worlgreen2 sentences2001Vaughn, 83 Wash.App. at 675 , 924 P.2d 27 ; see also State v. Worl, 91 Wash. App. 88, 94 , 955 P.2d 814 (1998) (reasoning *1076 from review of record that sentencing court would have imposed same exceptional sentence even if it had miscalculated offender score). 2001Vaughn, 83 Wash.App. at 675 , 924 P.2d 27 ; see also State v. Worl, 91 Wash. App. 88, 94 , 955 P.2d 814 (1998) (reasoning *1076 from review of record that sentencing court would have imposed same exceptional sentence even if it had miscalculated offender score). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hughesred1 sentence2013State v. Jackson, 150 Wn. d 2 251, 276, 76 P. d 217 (2003) citing State v. Gore, 143 Wn. d 288, 321, 21 P. d 262 (2001), 3 ( 2 3 overruled by Hughes, 154 Wn.2d 118 , abrogated by Recuenco, 548 U. .212).Accordingly, we S affirm Douglas's exceptional sentence. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. SH
green
2 sentences2025“This court can affirm a manifest injustice finding if one or more of the factors supported by the record clearly and convincingly support the disposition and we can determine that the trial court would have entered the same sentence on the basis of the remaining valid aggravating factors.” S.H., 75 Wn. 2004And, as the trial court concluded: “[A]ny one of [the aggravating factors] standing alone would justify the imposition of a manifest injustice disposition of 104 weeks in this case.” “This court can affirm a manifest injustice finding if one or more of the factors supported by the record clearly and convincingly support the disposition and [the court] can determine . . . the same sentence on the basis of the remaining valid aggravating factors.” S.H., 75 Wn. | 5 | 1999–2025 |
State v. Vaughn
green
2 sentences2001Vaughn, 83 Wash.App. at 675 , 924 P.2d 27 ; see also State v. Worl, 91 Wash. App. 88, 94 , 955 P.2d 814 (1998) (reasoning *1076 from review of record that sentencing court would have imposed same exceptional sentence even if it had miscalculated offender score). 2001Vaughn, 83 Wn. | 2 | 2001–2001 |
State v. SS
green
2 sentences1994State v. S.S., 67 Wn. 1994State v. S.S., 67 Wn. | 2 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Dunaway
green
2 sentences1992State v. Barnes, 117 Wn.2d at 712 (citing State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 220 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987)). 1992State v. Barnes, 117 Wn.2d at 712 (citing State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 220 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987)). | 2 | 1989–1992 |
State v. Payne
green
2 sentences1992State v. Payne, 58 Wn. 1992State v. Payne, 58 Wn. | 2 | 1992–1992 |
Allingham v. City of Seattle
green
2 sentences1992State v. Barnes, 117 Wn.2d at 712 (citing State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 220 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987)). 1989State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 219-20 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987). | 2 | 1989–1992 |
State v. Smith
green
2 sentences2016Cf State v. Smith, 123 Wn.2d 51 , 864 P.2d 1371 (1993) (where exceptional sentence exceeded standard sentence by almost six times, it was unclear whether trial court would have imposed the same sentence if it had only considered the valid aggravating factors). 2016Cf State v. Smith, 123 Wn.2d 51 , 864 P.2d 1371 (1993) (where exceptional sentence exceeded standard sentence by almost six times, it was unclear whether trial court would have imposed the same sentence if it had only considered the valid aggravating factors). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Barnes
green
1 sentence1992State v. Barnes, 117 Wn.2d at 712 (citing State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 220 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987)). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.