Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 Haw. 403 - State v. Foster

State v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
3
states following
June 2020
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably State v. Kelekolio (1993), State v. Cummings (1967)

48 state decisions

2601960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Morissette v. United States · Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. · United States v. Hines · Hornsby v. State · Dennison v. State

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

  1. “That condition is one for the consideration of the jury in determining the weight or effect to be given to the confession or statement.... “Evidence tending to establish that a confessor was ill or in a hysterical condition, and therefore not in full possession of his faculties at the time he confessed his guilt, does not affect the admissibility of the confession, but bears on the weight and effect to be given the confession. * * * ” [Citations omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “in this jurisdiction the rule has been recognized that although a court may, upon a hearing preliminary to the admission of a confession in evidence, determine that the confession was freely and voluntarily made[,] where the evidence is conflicting, the ultimate determination of its voluntary character is for the jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] stipulation in and of itself may be set aside if it was made inadvertently, unadvisedly or improvidently and will operate inequitably and to the prejudice of one of the parties, provided all . . . parties may be placed in the condition in which they were before the stipulation was made.”
    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.