Washington Supreme Court· 12/15/1983
State v. Johnson
Citations
- 674 P.2d 145
- 100 Wash. 2d 607
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that production-shifting presumptions are to be judged under same standard as permissive presumptions
- holding that the specific crime intended is not an \element\ of burglary
- holding that production-shifting presumptions are to be judged under same standard as permissive presumptions
- finding constitutional instructional error where the jury instructions omitted an element of the crime
- finding constitutional instructional error where the jury instructions omitted an element of the crime
- court found that language \unless such entering or remaining shall be explained by evidence satisfactory to you\ may have been interpreted as a mandatory presumption
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Utter, Rosellini
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
98 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. O'HaraWashington Supreme Court· 2009-10-01· cited 697×
- State v. ScottWashington Supreme Court· 1988-06-09· cited 576×
- State v. BergeronWashington Supreme Court· 1985-12-12· cited 220×
- State v. GardnerOhio Supreme Court· 2008-06-18· cited 220×
- State v. LeachWashington Supreme Court· 1989-11-22· cited 215×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 1997-02-06· cited 195×
- State v. RupeWashington Supreme Court· 1987-09-17· cited 177×
- State v. HendersonWashington Supreme Court· 1990-06-14· cited 173×
- State v. JeffriesWashington Supreme Court· 1986-03-27· cited 172×
- State v. AcostaWashington Supreme Court· 1984-05-24· cited 168×
- State v. LivelyWashington Supreme Court· 1996-08-29· cited 166×
- State v. SteinWashington Supreme Court· 2001-07-12· cited 156×
- State v. HandranWashington Supreme Court· 1989-07-25· cited 134×
- State v. SargentCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1985-04-22· cited 123×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 1985-10-03· cited 122×
- State v. HopperWashington Supreme Court· 1992-01-07· cited 121×
- State v. JonesWashington Supreme Court· 1984-02-09· cited 101×
- State v. BarryWashington Supreme Court· 2015-06-04· cited 99×
- State v. DealWashington Supreme Court· 1996-02-29· cited 92×
- State v. HargroveCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2013-02-01· cited 90×
Cites
42 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court· 1972-06-22· cited 12,108×
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court· 1979-06-18· cited 3,585×
- County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court· 1979-06-04· cited 1,990×
- State v. GreenWashington Supreme Court· 1980-08-28· cited 1,403×
- Pollard v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1957-02-25· cited 744×
- Connecticut v. JohnsonSupreme Court· 1983-02-23· cited 606×
- State v. WorkmanWashington Supreme Court· 1978-09-07· cited 578×
- State v. ArndtWashington Supreme Court· 1976-08-05· cited 245×
- State v. FrancoWashington Supreme Court· 1982-01-15· cited 186×
- United States v. Willie WhitakerD.C. Circuit· 1971-05-27· cited 182×
- State v. BondsWashington Supreme Court· 1982-11-10· cited 163×
- State v. RobertsWashington Supreme Court· 1977-02-24· cited 160×
- People v. FaillaCalifornia Supreme Court· 1966-05-16· cited 157×
- United States v. Larry Burdette JohnsonNinth Circuit· 1980-08-29· cited 152×
- State v. RoybalWashington Supreme Court· 1973-07-26· cited 151×
- State v. EmmanuelWashington Supreme Court· 1953-07-02· cited 129×
- John Richard Bayless v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1967-07-19· cited 109×
- State v. EvansWashington Supreme Court· 1981-09-03· cited 86×
- United States v. Roy L. Thomas, Jr.D.C. Circuit· 1971-04-26· cited 81×
- State v. PersingerWashington Supreme Court· 1963-06-13· cited 80×
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.