State v. Bell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• Trial court held to have discretion as to whether interpreter is too interested, to serve; decision only disturbed if evidence of abuse exists
• Trial court held to have discretion as to whether interpreter is too interested to serve; decision only disturbed if evidence of abuse exists
• allowing victim’s advocate for police department as interpreter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Van Tran
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 1993-09-27· cited 288×
• State v. Cheatam
  Washington Supreme Court· 2003-12-11· cited 160×
• State v. Cervantes
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1991-09-03· cited 5×
• State v. Kan Ting Fung
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 1995-12-07· cited 4×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Allery
  Washington Supreme Court· 1984-05-17· cited 198×
• Walker v. Bangs
  Washington Supreme Court· 1979-11-01· cited 84×
• State v. Coe
  Washington Supreme Court· 1988-01-28· cited 72×
• State v. Moon
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1986-10-20· cited 37×
• State v. Hanson
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-01-26· cited 35×
• John Winston Prince v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections
  Fifth Circuit· 1970-05-12· cited 20×
• State v. Trevino
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1973-12-06· cited 17×
• State v. Taylor
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1988-02-01· cited 15×
• State v. Moon
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-07-13· cited 12×
• State v. Johnson
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-10-12· cited 12×
• State v. Ward
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1989-08-21· cited 7×