Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1998 ND 30 - Hopfauf v. State

Hopfauf v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 2016

16 state decisions

80199820002010decided

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 State v. Wilson

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

  1. “[i]t would be blatantly unfair to subject a defendant’s post-conviction application to summary dismissal for failure to pro vide evidentiary support not available in the record of prior proceedings, when the statute explicitly provides such evi-dentiary support is “unnecessary” in the original application. The defendant is not required to provide evidentiary support for such allegations until he has been given notice he is being put on his proof.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.