Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 601 P2D 464 - Hunt v. State

Hunt v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently August 2012 · most notably Renfro v. State (1980), Jones v. State (1983)

34 state decisions

34019791980199020002010decided

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 Furman v. Georgia · Hamling v. United States · Miller v. California · Smith v. People of the State of California · United States v. Batchelder

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

  1. “(Emphasis added) The State argues that because the word 'knowingly' was in the information and because the jury was instructed that the State had to prove each element alleged in the information beyond a reasonable doubt, there was a sufficient instruction on scienter. This is absurd. If one followed the State's argument, there would only be two instructions necessary in any criminal case-one iterating what was set out in the information and one saying that the State was required to prove everything alleged in the information beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “punishment range was enacted last. {15 In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court in Batchelder rejected a claim that multiple criminal statutes, which address the same or overlapping conduct, necessarily presented any due process or equal protection concerns. The Court saw no problem in the fact that the prosecutor could choose which statute to apply, so long as the selection”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The appellant in the present case submitted three requested instructions relating to scienter, yet the only reference to scienter was in instruction No. 3, which stated that 'any person who knowingly buys, sells ... any moving picture ... which is obscene, ... is deemed guilty of a felony ....”
    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.