State v. Apao’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 125 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 130 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[[Image here]] [In Apao , ] [t]he supreme court stated that the better rule is to include in the indictment the allegations which, if proved, would result in application of a statute enhancing the penalty for the crime committed. This will give defendants fair notice of the charges against them.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Kekuewa · 10 Haw. App. 535 - State v. Schroeder

2. ““Instruction No. 28: Under our law, if a defendant is charged with an offense and the jury is not satisfied, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is guilty of the offense charged, the defendant may be convicted of a lesser offense which is included within the offense with which he has been charged, provided, of course, that the evidence in the case convinces the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of such lesser-included offense. “In this case, the lesser-included offense is Murder. A person commits the criminal offense of Murder if he is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if, with the intention of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he solicits the other person to commit it. “In order to convict the Defendant of the lesser-included offense of Murder, the State must prove each element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. These elements are, as to Count One, wherein the victim is Paul Roger Warford: 1) That Defendant did solicit Anthony K. Kekona, Jr. to intentionally or knowingly cause the death of Paul Roger Warford; 2) That the Defendant did so with the intention of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense of murder. As to Count 2, wherein the victim is David Blue: 1) That Defendant did solicit Anthony K. Kekona, Jr. to intentionally or knowingly cause the death of David Blue.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 3 Haw. App. 107 - State v. Lincoln · State v. Churchill

3. “COUNT I: On or about the 13th day of April, 1985, in the City and County of Honolulu, State of Hawaii, ERIC W. SCHROEDER, while in the course of committing theft, and while armed with a dangerous instrument, to wit, a handgun, did threaten the imminent use of force against Phillip M. Richards, a person who was present, with the intent to compel acquiescence to the taking of or escaping with the property, thereby committing the offense of Robbery in the First Degree in violation of Section 708 — 840C l)(b)(ii) of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. COUNT II: On or about the 13th day of April, 1985, in the City and County of Honolulu, State of Hawaii, ERIC W. SCHROEDER did intentionally restrain Phillip M. Richards with intent to facilitate the commission of a felony or flight after the commission of a felony, thereby committing the offense of Kidnapping in violation of Section 707-720(l)(c) of the Hawaii Revised Statutes.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Soares · 10 Haw. App. 535 - State v. Schroeder