Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 5 Haw. App. 644 - State v. Correa

5 Haw. App. 644 - State v. Correa’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
4
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably State v. Salamon (2008), State v. Orosco (1992)

1 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

20019851990200020102020decided

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 3 Haw. App. 300 - State v. Halemanu · 5 Haw. App. 127 - State v. DeCenso · 3 Haw. App. 287 - State v. Tuua · State v. Faatea · State v. Black

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. “a kidnapping that is necessarily and incidentally committed during a robbery cannot be the basis of a charge of kidnapping in addition to a charge of robbery”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) Except as otherwise provided in section 701-115, no person may be convicted of an offense unless the following are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: (a) Each element of the offense; (b) The state of mind required to establish each element of the offense; (c) Facts establishing jurisdiction; (d) Facts establishing venue; and (e) Facts establishing that the offense was committed within the time period specified in section 701-108. (2) In the absence of the proof required in subsection (1), the innocence of the defendant is presumed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the offense of Robbery in the First Degree in violation of Section 708-840(1)(b)(ii) [(1985) ] of the [HRS]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.