Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 Idaho 736 - Hays v. State

Hays v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
October 2011
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably Larkin v. State (1988), Mata v. State (1993)

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 29 state decisions

2101987199020002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Solem v. Helm · Rummel v. Estelle · State v. Toohill · State v. Reinke

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.

  1. “(1) the district court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgment of conviction; (2) the sentence was unlawful due to lack of opportunity for psychiatric treatment; (3) Hays did not receive effective assistance of counsel; (4) the state breached the plea agreement; (5) the sentence was unconstitutional because of its disproportionality; and (6) the state’s information failed to allege physical contact with the victims as assertedly required by [then] I.C. § 18-6607.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(i) the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; (ii) the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; and (iii) the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions.”
    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.