State v. Matias’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 2023
20 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 Apprendi v. New Jersey · State v. Arceo · State v. Richie · State v. Jenkins · State v. Hoey
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“And, the jury should also be required to determine whether [the defendant] had one intention, one general impulse, and one plan to commit both offenses.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Shaw · Smith v. State“(1) When the same conduct of a defendant may establish an element of more than one offense, the defendant may be prosecuted for each offense of which such conduct is an element. The defendant may not, however, be convicted of more than one offense if: ... (e) The offense is defined as a continuing course of conduct and the defendant’s course of conduct was uninterrupted, unless the law provides that specific periods of conduct constitute separate offenses.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Deguair · State v. Padilla“"`We may recognize plain error when the error committed affects substantial rights of the defendant.'" State v. Cordeiro, 99 Hawai'i 390, 405 , 56 P.3d 692, 707 , reconsideration denied, 100 Hawai'i 14 , 58 P.3d 72 (2002) (quoting State v. Jenkins, 93 Hawai'i 87, 101 , 997 P.2d 13, 27 (2000) (quoting State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997))). See also [Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure] HRPP Rule 52(b) (1993) ("Plain error or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court.").”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Rivera · State v. Vellina
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.