Washington Supreme Court· 5/24/2001

State v. Woods

Citations

143 Wash. 2d 561
23 P.3d 1046
2001 Wash. LEXIS 378

How courts have described this case

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

holding that waiving admission of mitigating evidence in a capital case must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, but the waiver is presumed to be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent if part of trial strategy
holding that waiving admission of mitigating evidence in a capital case must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, but the waiver is presumed to be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent if part of trial strategy
holding that the fact that the declarant told her father that she had gone to bed early when she was still awake and “ready to party” did not mean that her declarations were not an excited utterance
finding that the declarant was still under the stress of the event because she was “very emotional, very distraught, clearly upset”
rejecting a claim that the death penalty was imposed as a result of passion or prejudice
stating that although crime laboratory’s delay in completing deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Alexander, Sanders

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

95 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

69 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Woods

425 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.