State v. Hough’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably State v. Nelson (1998), State v. Weaverling (1999)
31 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 United States v. Masters · State v. Lyle · State v. Adams · State v. Williams · State v. Parker
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““furnishes part of the context of the crime” or is necessary to a “full presentation” of the case, or is so intimately connected with and explanatory of the crime charged against the defendant and is so much a part of the setting of the case and its “environment” that its proof is appropriate in order “to complete the story of the crime on trial by proving its immediate context or the ‘res gestae’ ” or the “uncharged offense is ‘so linked together in point of time and circumstances with the crime charged that one cannot be fully shown without proving the other.’ ””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Here ... the temporal proximity of the cocaine use to the robbery and murder is so close that one cannot deny that the cocaine use was so much a part of the “environment” of the crime that omitting the evidence of it would unnecessarily fragmentize the State’s case____ The use of the cocaine here was inextricably intertwined with the robbery and murder. Under these circumstances, such evidence was properly admitted as part of the res gestae of the crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Dickerson“a close degree of similarity or connection between the prior bad act and the crime is necessary. The connection between the prior bad act and the crime must be more than just a general similarity. A common scheme or plan concerns more than the commission of two similar crimes; some connection between the crimes is necessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Berry
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.