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.
13 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2020 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Holmes v. South Carolinagreen2 sentences2015Holmes, 547 U.S. at 327 . 10 When the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the *752 “defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.” State v. Clark, 78 Wn. 2015Holmes, 547 U.S. at 327 . 10 When the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the *752 “defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.” State v. Clark, 78 Wn. | 1 | 4 |
State v. Hiltongreen2 sentences2020However, “[w]hen the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the ‘defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.’” State v. Hilton, 164 Wn. 2020However, “[w]hen the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the ‘defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.’” State v. Hilton, 164 Wn. | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Clark
green
2 sentences2015Holmes, 547 U.S. at 327 . 10 When the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the *752 “defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.” State v. Clark, 78 Wn. 2015Holmes, 547 U.S. at 327 . 10 When the State’s case is entirely circumstantial, the Downs rule is relaxed to an extent to allow a reply in kind: the *752 “defendant may neutralize or overcome such evidence by presenting sufficient evidence of the same character tending to identify some other person as the perpetrator of the crime.” State v. Clark, 78 Wn. | 7 | 1996–2020 |
State v. Maupin
green
2 sentences2016In contrast, we held in State v. Maupin that eyewitness testimony that a kidnapping victim was seen after the kidnapping with a person other than the defendant was both relevant and sufficiently probative to pass the Downs test. 128 Wn.2d 918, 928 , 913 P.2d 808 (1996). 2016In contrast, we held in State v. Maupin that eyewitness testimony that a kidnapping victim was seen after the kidnapping with a person other than the defendant was both relevant and sufficiently probative to pass the Downs test. 128 Wn.2d 918, 928 , 913 P.2d 808 (1996). | 4 | 2014–2016 |
State v. Franklin
green
2 sentences2016State v. Mullen, 171 Wn.2d 881 , 895, 3As a recent case from ourSupreme Court, State v. Franklin, 180Wn.2d 371, 381, 325 P.3d 159 (2014) observed, "[t]he Downs test in essence has not changed: some combination of facts or circumstances must point to a nonspeculative link between the other suspect and the charged crime[,]" in order for the evidence to be admissible. 2015The court stated that the Downs test remains essentially unchanged: "some combination of facts or circumstances must point to a non speculative link between the other suspect and the charged crime." Franklin, 180 Wn.2d at 381 . | 2 | 2015–2016 |
Leonard v. Territory
green
2 sentences2015App. 471, 479 , 898 P.2d 854 (citing Leonard v. Territory, 2 Wash. Terr. 381, 396 , 7 P. 872 (1885)), review denied, 128 Wn.2d 1004 (1995); accord State v. Hilton, 164 Wn. 2015App. 471, 479 , 898 P.2d 854 (citing Leonard v. Territory, 2 Wash. Terr. 381, 396 , 7 P. 872 (1885)), review denied, 128 Wn.2d 1004 (1995); accord State v. Hilton, 164 Wn. | 2 | 2011–2015 |
State v. Mullen
green
1 sentence2016State v. Mullen, 171 Wn.2d 881 , 895, 3As a recent case from ourSupreme Court, State v. Franklin, 180Wn.2d 371, 381, 325 P.3d 159 (2014) observed, "[t]he Downs test in essence has not changed: some combination of facts or circumstances must point to a nonspeculative link between the other suspect and the charged crime[,]" in order for the evidence to be admissible. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Downs
green
2 sentences2015The Franklin court reiterated that the Downs standard for relevance of other suspect evidence is whether there is evidence '''tending to connect' someone other than the defendant with the crime." Id. (citation omitted) (quoting Downs, 168 Wash. at 667 ). 2015The Franklin court reiterated that the Downs standard for relevance of other suspect evidence is whether there is evidence '''tending to connect' someone other than the defendant with the crime." Id. (citation omitted) (quoting Downs, 168 Wash. at 667 ). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Smithart v. State
green
2 sentences2015However, apparently for the first time in Washington case law, the Franklin court also explained with respect to the Downs relevance inquiry: Further, other jurisdictions have pointed out that this inquiry, properly conducted, "focuse[ s] upon whether the evidence offered tends to create a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, not whether it establishes the guilt of the third party beyond a reasonable doubt." Smithart v. State, 988 P.2d 583 , 588 & n.21 (Alaska 1999). 2015However, apparently for the first time in Washington case law, the Franklin court also explained with respect to the Downs relevance inquiry: Further, other jurisdictions have pointed out that this inquiry, properly conducted, "focuse[ s] upon whether the evidence offered tends to create a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, not whether it establishes the guilt of the third party beyond a reasonable doubt." Smithart v. State, 988 P.2d 583 , 588 & n.21 (Alaska 1999). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.