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.
11 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ohio v. Robertsred2 sentences2014See Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66 , 100 S. Ct. 2531 , 65 L. 2014See Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66 , 100 S. Ct. 2531 , 65 L. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kennedy
green
2 sentences2014No. 43289 -7 -II Subsequently, our Supreme Court in Kennedy, stated the indicia of reliability test without including the additional basis of knowledge requirement stated in Sieler. 107 Wn.2d at 7 . 2014Including this requirement creates an analysis similar to the Aguilar/Spinelli test for issuance of a warrant based on an informant’s tip. 4 ¶20 Subsequently, our Supreme Court in Kennedy stated the indicia of reliability test without including the additional basis of knowledge requirement stated in Sieler. 107 Wn.2d at 7 . | 2 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Rice
green
2 sentences2002Alternatively, the indicia of reliability test can be met if the statements "interlock" in accordance with our decision in Rice. 120 Wash.2d at 569-70 , 844 P.2d 416 . 2002Alternatively, the indicia of reliability test can be met if the statements “interlock” in accordance with our decision in Rice. 120 Wn.2d at 569-70 . | 2 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Lui
green
1 sentence2025Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Berlin
green
1 sentence2016State v. Berlin, 46 Wn. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. CJ
green
1 sentence2016C.J., 148 Wn.2d at 684 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Northness
green
1 sentence1987Stock , at 470-71; State v. Northness, 20 Wn. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Parris
green
2 sentences1984NOTES [1] At the time of trial, this person was no longer employed by the prosecutor's office. [2] U.S. Const. amend. 6 provides in part: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him ..." [3] Const. art. 1, § 22 (amend. 10) provides in part: "In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right ... to meet the witnesses against him face to face ..." [4] Although Const. art. 1, § 22 (amend. 10) is worded differently than U.S. Const. amend. 6 and arguably gives broader protection than the Sixth Amendment, see State v. P 1984NOTES [1] At the time of trial, this person was no longer employed by the prosecutor's office. [2] U.S. Const. amend. 6 provides in part: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him ..." [3] Const. art. 1, § 22 (amend. 10) provides in part: "In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right ... to meet the witnesses against him face to face ..." [4] Although Const. art. 1, § 22 (amend. 10) is worded differently than U.S. Const. amend. 6 and arguably gives broader protection than the Sixth Amendment, see State v. P | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.