State v. Hankins’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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

1. “There are several problems with that approach. First, of course, Kansas law governs what is and is not a conviction for purposes of establishing a defendant's criminal history. Second, in Gonseth v. State, 871 P.2d 51, 54 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994), which the majority cites, the court suggested that a defendant pleading guilty under a deferred sentencing and being ordered to fulfill certain conditions could then appeal. The court reasoned the process, at that point, could be treated as a 'conviction' upon a guilty plea within the meaning of the statute authorizing criminal appeals. But the holding is plainly limited to the statute governing appeals. And technically, the court recognized the appeal to be from a denial of the defendant's motion to withdraw the plea rather than from a conviction. 871 P.2d at 54 . More importantly, however, the Oklahoma appellate courts have recognized that a defendant successfully completing the deferred sentencing process cannot be treated as having been convicted of the underlying offense. Platt v. State, 2008 OK CR 20, ¶ 13 , 188 P.3d 196 (Construing the comparable deferred sentencing process for drug offenders, the court finds that after the charges have been dismissed, the defendants' guilty pleas 'would not constitute prior "convictions”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Hankins

2. “effectively negates the invited error doctrine with respect to a defendant's criminal 5 history and, thus, allows a defendant to challenge a legal mistake in his or her criminal history even after admitting to the mistaken history at sentencing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Hankins

3. “' impairing the right to possess firearms under Oklahoma law.). (Emphasis added.) The circumstances considered in Platt match Hankins' situation; those in Gonseth do not.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Hankins