Case Citator › Davis v. Washington

Davis v. Washington

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
547 U.S. 813
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
200 of 201
Citing cases (total)
4,094
Treatment dates
2009
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Davis v. Washington has one confirmed treatment, listed below: the Ninth Circuit held that Davis did not apply retroactively to a case already final on direct review. 200 of the 201 flagged citations were read; the text of the other one could not be retrieved.
More on how this was screened

The other reviewed opinions applied Davis's primary-purpose and testimonial-statement framework, reported Crawford v. Washington's displacement of Ohio v. Roberts, addressed older authorities, or rejected adverse arguments. CourtListener lists the same Riva v. Kirkland memorandum twice; it produces one entry.

The treatments below are confirmed; unread citations could still change the overall status.
Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case, except the ones whose text could not be retrieved.

4,094 later cases cite Davis v. Washington; 201 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading; 200 of them have been read, and the text of 1 citing opinion could not be retrieved, so it remains unread. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Davis v. Washington?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The court held that Davis did not apply retroactively because it was issued after the defendant's case became final on direct review.

    Riva v. Kirkland · Ninth Circuit (unpublished memorandum) · filed

    Davis, however, was not issued until 2006. Riva suggests no valid reason why it should apply to his case.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Davis v. Washington and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace