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.
12 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2025 2 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. Myersgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015Accord, State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) ("Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte."); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P .2d 1102 (1997) ("The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested."); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 5 | 4 | 6 |
State v. Myersgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2011State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested.”); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 51, 52 , 541 P.2d 1222 (1975) (no reversible error for the lack of a limiting instruction where no instruction requested). ¶12 Russell argues that this court has created an exception to the above rule for cases involving evidence | 3 | 5 |
State v. Russellgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015Accord, State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) ("Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte."); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P .2d 1102 (1997) ("The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested."); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 5 | 2 | 3 |
State v. Russellgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015Accord, State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) ("Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte."); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P .2d 1102 (1997) ("The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested."); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 5 | 2 | 2 |
Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.green2 sentences2016See Lockwood v. AC&S, Inc., 109 Wn.2d 235, 255 , 744 P.2d 605 (1987); State v. Newbern, 95 Wn. 2016See Lockwood v. AC&S, Inc., 109 Wn.2d 235, 255 , 744 P.2d 605 (1987); State v. Newbern, 95 Wn. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Noyesgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Athan
green
2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015Accord, State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) ("Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte."); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P .2d 1102 (1997) ("The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested."); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 5 | 7 | 2011–2025 |
State v. Athan
green
2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015Accord, State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) ("Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte."); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P .2d 1102 (1997) ("The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error if no instruction was requested."); State v. Hess, 86 Wn.2d 5 | 7 | 2011–2025 |
State v. Hess
green
2 sentences2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error 2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error | 4 | 2011–2015 |
State v. Newbern
green
2 sentences2016See Lockwood v. AC&S, Inc., 109 Wn.2d 235, 255 , 744 P.2d 605 (1987); State v. Newbern, 95 Wn. 2015See State v. Noyes, 69 Wn.2d 441, 446-47 , 418 P.2d 471 (1966); accord State v. Russell, 171 Wn.2d 118, 123-24 , 249 P.3d 604 (2011) (“Since Noyes, this court has continued to hold that absent a request for a limiting instruction, the trial court is not required to give one sua sponte.”); State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354, 383 , 158 P.3d 27 (2007) (the omission of a limiting instruction is not reversible error where defendant fails to request the instruction during trial); State v. Myers, 133 Wn.2d 26, 36 , 941 P.2d 1102 (1997) (“The failure of a court to give a cautionary instruction is not error | 3 | 2015–2016 |
State v. Wilcoxon
green
1 sentence2019State v. Wilcoxon, 185 Wn. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. McRaft
neutral
2 sentences1984People v. McRaft, 102 Mich. App. 204 , 301 N.W.2d 852 (1981). 1984People v. McRaft, 102 Mich. App. 204 , 301 N.W.2d 852 (1981). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.