Washington Supreme Court· 11/5/1987
State v. Box
Citations
- 745 P.2d 23
- 109 Wash. 2d 320
- 1987 Wash. LEXIS 1338
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- placing burden of proving insanity on defendant not unconstitutional as a violation of due process
- an insanity instruction “require[s] a defendant to bear the initial burden of producing some evidence”
- insanity does not negate an element of first degree murder
- defendant bears burden of proof on insanity defense
- insanity does not negate an element of first degree murder
- “In Washington ... to prove that he is legally insane ... the defendant must prove that at the time of the offense he or she was unable to perceive the nature and quality of the act charged or was unable to tell right from wrong with regard to that act.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Andersen, Dore
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. W.R.Washington Supreme Court· 2014-10-30· cited 209×
- State v. GracianoWashington Supreme Court· 2013-01-31· cited 185×
- William B. Greene v. John LambertNinth Circuit· 2002-03-26· cited 173×
- State v. RiceWashington Supreme Court· 1988-06-09· cited 168×
- State v. RikerWashington Supreme Court· 1994-03-03· cited 161×
- State v. CamaraWashington Supreme Court· 1989-10-31· cited 73×
- State v. SommervilleWashington Supreme Court· 1988-09-08· cited 60×
- State v. GreeneWashington Supreme Court· 1999-09-30· cited 53×
- State v. GoughCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1989-03-15· cited 32×
- State v. PlattWashington Supreme Court· 2001-03-15· cited 29×
- State v. ChanthaboulyCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2011-09-27· cited 25×
- State v. HamletWashington Supreme Court· 1997-10-09· cited 24×
- In Re Estate of KissingerWashington Supreme Court· 2009-05-07· cited 24×
- Hoss v. HogeWashington Supreme Court· 2009-05-07· cited 21×
- Commonwealth v. KeitaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1999-06-29· cited 21×
- Pugh v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1989-10-24· cited 20×
- State v. DowCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2011-06-21· cited 19×
- State v. MatthewsCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2006-05-22· cited 10×
- State v. MonaghanCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2012-02-07· cited 8×
- State v. SwagertyCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1991-04-11· cited 6×
Cites
22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court· 1970-05-18· cited 11,712×
- Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court· 1975-06-09· cited 3,396×
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court· 1977-06-17· cited 2,751×
- State v. GunwallWashington Supreme Court· 1986-06-12· cited 1,052×
- Leland v. OregonSupreme Court· 1952-10-13· cited 1,010×
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1983-06-29· cited 741×
- State v. McCullumWashington Supreme Court· 1983-03-10· cited 291×
- State v. AcostaWashington Supreme Court· 1984-05-24· cited 168×
- State v. CrenshawWashington Supreme Court· 1983-02-17· cited 163×
- State v. RobertsWashington Supreme Court· 1977-02-24· cited 160×
- Rivera v. DelawareSupreme Court· 1976-10-12· cited 155×
- State v. KrollWashington Supreme Court· 1976-12-16· cited 152×
- State v. WhiteWashington Supreme Court· 1962-09-25· cited 141×
- State v. StrasburgWashington Supreme Court· 1910-09-10· cited 107×
- State v. CollinsWashington Supreme Court· 1957-08-22· cited 94×
- State v. BinghamWashington Supreme Court· 1986-05-15· cited 82×
- State v. McDonaldWashington Supreme Court· 1977-11-17· cited 65×
- State v. ReeceWashington Supreme Court· 1971-07-15· cited 29×
- State v. ClarkWashington Supreme Court· 1904-04-04· cited 27×
- State v. PetersCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1987-05-28· cited 15×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.