125 Wash. 2d 847 - State v. Lough’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
160 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 160 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably State v. Brown (1997), State v. Pirtle (1995)
160 state decisions
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 Lisenba v. People of State of California · Rodriguez v. New York · Payless Wholesale Distributor, Inc. v. Albert Culver (P.R.) Inc. · 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · 7 Cal. 4th 380 - People v. Ewoldt
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 160 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Magers · State v. Hartzell“committed markedly similar acts of misconduct against similar victims under similar circumstances.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“ER 404(b) is not designed `to deprive the State of relevant evidence necessary to establish an essential element of its case,' but rather to prevent the State from suggesting that a defendant is guilty because he or she is a criminal-type person who would be likely to commit the crime charged.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ra · State v. Foxhoven
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.