Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 Wash. 2d 176 - State v. Hughes

106 Wash. 2d 176 - State v. Hughes’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

165
cited by 165 later decisions
5
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

165 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 165 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably State v. Brown (1997), 114 Wash. 2d 907 - Industrial Indem. Co. of Northwest, Inc. v. Kallevig (1990)

165 state decisions

66019861990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Witherspoon v. Illinois · Lockett v. Ohio · Wainwright v. Witt · Taylor v. Louisiana · Adams v. Texas

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 165 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “`prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.