Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 108 N.M. 560 - State v. Howard

State v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2019

18 state decisions

1001989199020002010decided

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 Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · State v. Lankford · State v. Linam · Security Escrow Corp. v. State of Taxation & Revenue Department · State v. Harris

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We do not believe the legislature intended to give a defendant credit for additional time, when charged with and convicted of multiple offenses arising from a single criminal action. The court must give effect to legislative intent that will avoid absurd, unreasonable, or unjust results. Thus, [the credit-for-time-served statute] has been construed to mean that a defendant is entitled to one day’s credit against his total sentence for each day spent in presentence confinement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The purpose of Section 31-18-17 is to deter future crimes____Enhancement of the basic sentence for each felony conviction effects that deterrent purpose. The fact that some deterrent purpose would be served by enhancing only the total sentence is not dispositive of the legislature’s intent in drafting Section 31-18-17.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “This did not change the requirement that the sentence for current multiple felonies be enhanced on the basis of prior felony convictions. Each of the four current felony convictions is ‘a’ felony; the statute requires that the sentence for each of the current convictions be enhanced.”
    1 later decision 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.