8 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Karlberg v. Ottengreen2 sentences2020App. 522, 531-32 , 280 P.3d 1123 (2012) (“A failure to preserve a claim of error by presenting it first to the trial court generally means the issue is waived. 2013App. 522, 531 , 280 P.3d 1123 (2012) ("A failure to preserve a claim of error by presenting it first to the trial court generally means the issue is waived. | 2 | 3 |
State v. Lazcanogreen1 sentence2026State v. Lazcano, 188 Wn. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Lamargreen2 sentences2017App. at 654 . 66 BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1617 (10th ed. 2014). 67RAP 2.5(a)(3); see also State v. Lamar, 180 Wn.2d 576, 582 , 327 P.3d 46 (2014). 22 No. 72951-9-1/23 this limited exception to a failure to preserve error based on the answers to two questions: "(1) Has the party claiming error shown the error is truly of a constitutional magnitude, and if so,(2) has the party demonstrated that the error is manifest?"68 If Gill establishes a manifest constitutional error, this court conducts the harmless error analysis to determine if the error requires reversa1.69 Here, the State proposed a volun 2017App. at 654 . 66 BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1617 (10th ed. 2014). 67RAP 2.5(a)(3); see also State v. Lamar, 180 Wn.2d 576, 582 , 327 P.3d 46 (2014). 22 No. 72951-9-1/23 this limited exception to a failure to preserve error based on the answers to two questions: "(1) Has the party claiming error shown the error is truly of a constitutional magnitude, and if so,(2) has the party demonstrated that the error is manifest?"68 If Gill establishes a manifest constitutional error, this court conducts the harmless error analysis to determine if the error requires reversa1.69 Here, the State proposed a volun | 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. Blazina
green
1 sentence2015State v. Blazina, 174 Wn. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Duncan
green
1 sentence2015Duncan, 180 Wn. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
In Re the Personal Restraint of Rupe
green
2 sentences1995The State asks this court to clarify whether invited error will be reviewed in capital cases, citing cases from other jurisdictions which apply the invited error rule in capital cases. [127] [46] In In re Rupe, 115 Wn.2d 379, 382 , 798 P.2d 780 (1990), we reviewed an instruction which had been proposed by defense counsel in the context of an ineffectiveness of counsel issue. 1995The State asks this court to clarify whether invited error will be reviewed in capital cases, citing cases from other jurisdictions which apply the invited error rule in capital cases. [127] [46] In In re Rupe, 115 Wn.2d 379, 382 , 798 P.2d 780 (1990), we reviewed an instruction which had been proposed by defense counsel in the context of an ineffectiveness of counsel issue. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.