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.
9 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Utah v. Strieffgreen2 sentences2016See Utah v. Strieff, _U.S. _, 136 S. Ct. 2056, 2070 , 195 L. 2016See Utah v. Strieff, _U.S. _, 136 S. Ct. 2056, 2070 , 195 L. | 2 | 2 |
Utah v. Strieffgreen2 sentences2016See Utah v. Strieff, _U.S. _, 136 S. Ct. 2056, 2070 , 195 L. 2016See Utah v. Strieff, _U.S. _, 136 S. Ct. 2056, 2070 , 195 L. | 2 | 2 |
Phillips v. Associates Home Equity Services, Inc.green2 sentences2002See Phillips, 179 F.Supp.2d at 846 ; Camacho, 167 F.Supp.2d at 897 . 2002See Phillips, 179 F. Supp. 2d at 846 ; Camacho, 167 F. Supp. 2d at 897 . | 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. Mendez
red
2 sentences2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. 2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. | 3 | 2001–2016 |
State v. Mendez
red
2 sentences2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. 2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. | 2 | 2001–2016 |
Maryland v. Wilson
green
2 sentences2016Wilson, 519 U.S. at 412 -14 (quoting Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111 ). ¶43 The majority’s decision to apply the Mendez rule to pedestrians ignores this reasoning and the limits it implies. 13 First, a Terry-like stop is far from a de minimis intrusion. 2016Wilson, 519 U.S. at 412 -14 (quoting Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111 ). ¶43 The majority’s decision to apply the Mendez rule to pedestrians ignores this reasoning and the limits it implies. 13 First, a Terry-like stop is far from a de minimis intrusion. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Camacho v. Holiday Homes, Inc.
green
2 sentences2002See Phillips, 179 F.Supp.2d at 846 ; Camacho, 167 F.Supp.2d at 897 . 2002See Phillips, 179 F. Supp. 2d at 846 ; Camacho, 167 F. Supp. 2d at 897 . | 2 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Whitaker
green
2 sentences2001However, whether the deputy’s directive constituted an unlawful seizure of Reynolds is immaterial in this case because Reynolds clearly cannot meet the second requirement — the demonstration of “a causal nexus between the unlawful conduct and the abandonment.” Whitaker, 58 Wn. 2001However, whether the deputy’s directive constituted an unlawful seizure of Reynolds is immaterial in this case because Reynolds clearly cannot meet the second requirement — the demonstration of “a causal nexus between the unlawful conduct and the abandonment.” Whitaker, 58 Wn. | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Yakima County v. Yakima Herald-Republic
green
1 sentence2025We approved of Mendez’s analysis in Yakima Herald-Republic. 170 Wn.2d at 801 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Brendlin v. California
green
2 sentences2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. 2016The question in this case is whether we should expand the narrow Mendez exception quite a bit further, to the factual situation presented in 2 State v. Mendez, 137 Wn.2d 208, 220 , 970 P.2d 722 (1999), abrogated on other grounds by Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 , 127 S. Ct. 2400 , 168 L. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Pennsylvania v. Mimms
green
2 sentences2016Wilson, 519 U.S. at 412 -14 (quoting Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111 ). ¶43 The majority’s decision to apply the Mendez rule to pedestrians ignores this reasoning and the limits it implies. 13 First, a Terry-like stop is far from a de minimis intrusion. 2016Wilson, 519 U.S. at 412 -14 (quoting Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111 ). ¶43 The majority’s decision to apply the Mendez rule to pedestrians ignores this reasoning and the limits it implies. 13 First, a Terry-like stop is far from a de minimis intrusion. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Nettles
green
2 sentences2001However, whether the deputy's directive constituted an unlawful seizure of Reynolds is immaterial in this case because Reynolds clearly cannot meet the second requirementthe demonstration of "a causal nexus between the unlawful conduct and the abandonment." Whitaker, 58 Wash. App. at 853 , 795 P.2d 182 ; Nettles, 70 Wash. App. at 708 , 855 P.2d 699 . 2001However, whether the deputy's directive constituted an unlawful seizure of Reynolds is immaterial in this case because Reynolds clearly cannot meet the second requirementthe demonstration of "a causal nexus between the unlawful conduct and the abandonment." Whitaker, 58 Wash. App. at 853 , 795 P.2d 182 ; Nettles, 70 Wash. App. at 708 , 855 P.2d 699 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
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.