Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 325 A2D 605 - In Re Hodges

In Re Hodges’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
May 1981
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · M. A. P. v. Ryan · Bolton v. Harris · Holiday Tours, Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission · In Re John Ballay, A/K/A Figeret Hoxha, Patient

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

  1. “The Court may order the Respondent’s hospitalization, only if you, the jury, are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, as I said, one, that the Respondent is mentally ill, and two, that because of that illness, the Respondent is likely to injure himself or others, if allowed to remain at liberty Now you are advised as I have said several times before, the Petitioner bears the burden of proof and must prove the elements beyond a reasonable doubt. If you find that that Petitioner has failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt, either one or both of these elements, the Court may not order the Respondent’s hospitalization or treatment, but will order his immediate release from the hospital. If, on the other hand you should find the Petitioner has established beyond a reasonable doubt both of these essential elements, the Court may order the Respondent hospitalized for an indeterminate period, or such other alternative course of treatment as the Court believes will be in the best interest of the Respondent, and of the public. Now the first essential element which the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, is that the Respondent is at the present time, mentally ill ... If you do not find beyond a reasonable doubt that the Respondent is mentally ill, then the case is at an end, that ends it. But if you find that the Respondent is mentally ill, then you must consider the second element of the case, whether because of the mental illness, the Respondent is likely to injure ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We find Judge Tamm’s scholarly reasoning in Bailay persuasive and, accordingly, adopt the holding of that decision. [ 325 A.2d at 607 .]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the court shall dismiss the petition and order his release.”
    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.