State v. Hoopii’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2021 · most notably State v. Arceo (1996), Kealoha v. County of Hawaii (1993)
2 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
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 Ake v. Oklahoma · State v. Pia · 2 Haw. App. 618 - Clarkin v. Reimann · 5 Haw. App. 127 - State v. DeCenso · Arnold v. Higa
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) there is but one intention, one general impulse, and one plan, (2) the two offenses are part and parcel of a continuing and uninterrupted course of conduct, and (3) the law does not provide that specific periods of conduct constitute separate offenses.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Caprio · State v. Vinge“does not apply where a [defendant's] actions constitute separate offenses under the law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Rabago · State v. APO“(d) General and Specific Prohibition of Designated Conduct. Subsection (l)(d) prohibits conviction of more than one offense based on the same conduct when the offenses differ only in that one is defined to prohibit a designated kind of conduct generally and the other to prohibit a specific instance of such conduct. For example, the same conduct cannot be the basis of convicting under a general statute prohibiting lewd conduct and under a specific statute prohibiting indecent exposure. In the absence of an expressed intention to the contrary, it is fair to assume that the legislature did not intend that there be more than one conviction under these circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Richie
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.