State v. Garrett

How courts have described this case

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

• provision containing both \should\ and \shall\ presumes drafters intended to distinguish between the terms
• word \should\ is permissible and expresses a desire or request

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Brown
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2008-06-10· cited 31×
• People v. Fosnaugh
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 2002-02-05· cited 17×
• State v. Hultenschmidt
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2004-12-07· cited 17×
• State v. Bosio
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-07-26· cited 16×
• Sheehan v. Zoning Board of Appeals
  Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2005-11-03· cited 16×
• State v. Meekins
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2005-01-19· cited 13×
• Washington v. Crowder
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2000-08-31· cited 7×
• State v. Hultenschmidt
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2005-01-11
• Sheehan ex rel. Eight Mates Trust v. Plymouth Zoning Board of Appeals
  Massachusetts Superior Court· 2003-07-02