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.
10 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2021 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. Woodsgreen2 sentences2015State v. Woods, 138 Wn. 2013See Appellant's Br. at 14 (citing State v. Woods, 138 Wn. | 1 | 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. Walden
green
2 sentences2015The Supreme Court fixed the landscape even more clearly in State v. Walden, 131 Wn.2d 469, 473 , 932 P. 2d 1237 ( 1997), holding that "[ t] o be entitled to a jury instruction on self - defense, the defendant must produce some evidence demonstrating defense," self - but specifying also that " once the defendant produces some evidence, the burden shifts to the prosecution to prove the absence of self defense - beyond a reasonable doubt." ( Emphasis added.) Under McCreven and consistently with Walden, the prosecutor' s argument that the jury need not consider the claim of self -defense if it dis 2015Walden, 131 Wn.2d at 473 ; McCreven, 170 Wn. | 4 | 1998–2015 |
State v. Walden
green
2 sentences2015State v. Walden, 131 Wn.2d 469,473 , 932 P.2d 1237 (1997). 2015The Supreme Court fixed the landscape even more clearly in State v. Walden, 131 Wn.2d 469, 473 , 932 P. 2d 1237 ( 1997), holding that "[ t] o be entitled to a jury instruction on self - defense, the defendant must produce some evidence demonstrating defense," self - but specifying also that " once the defendant produces some evidence, the burden shifts to the prosecution to prove the absence of self defense - beyond a reasonable doubt." ( Emphasis added.) Under McCreven and consistently with Walden, the prosecutor' s argument that the jury need not consider the claim of self -defense if it dis | 4 | 1998–2015 |
State v. Acosta
green
2 sentences2021State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612, 616 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). 2021State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612, 616 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). | 2 | 2020–2021 |
State v. McCullum
green
2 sentences2015SELF-DEFENSE Once the issue of self-defense is properly raised, the absence of self- defense "becomes another element of the offense which the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. McCullum. 98 Wn.2d 484, 493-94 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983). 2015SELF-DEFENSE Once the issue of self-defense is properly raised, the absence of self- defense "becomes another element of the offense which the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. McCullum. 98 Wn.2d 484, 493-94 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983). | 2 | 2015–2018 |
State of Washington v. Lisa Elaine Thysell
neutral
1 sentence2019This reason is unsupported by law, as a defendant “is entitled to a self-defense instruction when, considering all of the evidence, the jury could have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant 41 49534-1-II / 49555-4-II / 49556-2-II acted in self-defense.” State v. Thysell, 194 Wn. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. McCreven
green
1 sentence2015Walden, 131 Wn.2d at 473 ; McCreven, 170 Wn. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Janes
green
2 sentences1998State v. Walden, 131 Wash.2d 469, 473 , 932 P.2d 1237 (1997); Janes, 121 Wash.2d at 237 , 850 P.2d 495 . 1998State v. Walden, 131 Wash.2d 469, 473 , 932 P.2d 1237 (1997); Janes, 121 Wash.2d at 237 , 850 P.2d 495 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.