Skip to main content

State v. Cain

Citations

  • 624 P.2d 732
  • 28 Wash. App. 462
  • 1981 Wash. App. LEXIS 2034

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding “[a] finger is an object within the meaning and intent of the statute” criminalizing penetration with “an object”
  • holding “[a] finger is an object within the meaning and intent of the statute” criminalizing penetration with “an object”
  • providing that digital penetration is included in the definition of “sexual intercourse”
  • under former RCW 9.79.140(1), the predecessor statute to RCW 9A.44.010, the court concluded that \[a] finger is an object within the meaning and intent of the statute.\
  • under former RCW 9.79.140(1), the predecessor statute to RCW 9A.44.010, the court concluded that “[a] finger is an object within the meaning and intent of the statute.”
  • a finger is an \object\ under RCW 9A.44.010

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ringold

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.