Case Citator › State v. W.R.

State v. W.R.

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

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of Washington
Citation
181 Wash. 2d 757
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
91 of 91
Citing cases (total)
209
Treatment dates
2016
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. State v. W.R. remains binding, but its reach has been limited on collateral review: all 91 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below. In re Personal Restraint of Colbert held that W.R.'s burden-of-proof rule does not apply retroactively to convictions that were already final.
More on how this was screened

The other reviewed opinions applied W.R. positively, reported W.R.'s overruling of State v. Camara and State v. Gregory, or used unrelated “overruled” language. CourtListener's two clusters for Colbert were both screened but produce one reader-facing entry.

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.

209 later cases cite State v. W.R.; 91 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. 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 State v. W.R.?

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 Supreme Court of Washington held that W.R.'s rule reallocating the burden of proof on consent does not apply retroactively to convictions already final on collateral review.

    In re the Personal Restraint of Colbert · Supreme Court of Washington · filed

    We hold that W.R. does not apply retroactively and deny the petition as time barred.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads State v. W.R. 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