3 Haw. App. 516 - State v. Kido’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
October 2009
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hutto v. Finney · Rummel v. Estelle · Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Hill v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners, Local 25 · Hutto v. Davis
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In 1965, the Legislature enacted a law designed to end judicially imposed inconsistent sentences of imprisonment. This policy — known as true indeterminate sentencing — is continued. The court’s discretion is limited to choosing between imprisonment and other modes of sentencing. Once the court has decided to sentence a felon to imprisonment, the actual time of release is determined by parole authorities. Having decided on imprisonment, the court must then impose the maximum term authorized.... [Footnotes omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Rivera
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.