State v. Kealoha.’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3553
Relies on Anders v. California · Santobello v. New York · United States v. Peter A. Crusco and Phillip A. Cimmino. Appeal of Phillip Cimmino · State v. Gaylord · TSA International Ltd. v. Shimizu Corp.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n ordering restitution, the court shall not consider the defendant's financial ability to make restitution in determining the amount of restitution to order.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hueston v. State“[t]he court . . . shall consider the defendant's financial ability to make restitution for the purpose of establishing the time and manner of payment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hueston v. State“Whether imposed by free standing order, or as a condition of probation, restitution is part of the defendant's sentence and judgment of conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Foumai
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.