Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 Haw. 74 - State v. Nakamura

State v. Nakamura’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
2
states following
November 2019
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently November 2019 · most notably Kealoha v. County of Hawaii (1993), State v. Toyomura (1995)

43 state decisions

2001982199020002010decided

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 State v. Antone · State v. Kim · State v. O'DANIEL · State v. Vance · State v. Feliciano

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

  1. “We think [defendant] places entirely too much emphasis on the motive of the government in effecting his arrest.... [T]he focus of the entrapment defense is the conduct of the law enforcement officials in soliciting the cooperation of the accused. The inquiry is whether the methods of persuasion on the part of the officials were so extreme that it would induce a “reasonable [person]” to commit the offense charged. The motives of the agents in this case then, while reprehensible, [are] wholly without relevance to the issue in light of the rather mechanical determination to be applied.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) In any prosecution, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant engaged in the prohibited conduct or caused the prohibited result because he was induced or encouraged to do so by a law enforcement officer, or by a person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, who, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an offense, either: (b) Employed methods of persuasion or inducement which created a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by persons other than those who are ready to commit it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A public law enforcement official or a person acting in cooperation with such an official perpetrates an entrapment if for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an offense, [he or she] induces or encourages another person to engage in conduct constituting such offense by . . . employing methods of persuasion or inducement [that] create a substantial risk that such an offense will be committed by persons other than those who are ready to commit it.”
    1 later decision 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.