State v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 2005
6 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 Keller v. Thompson · State v. Ui
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Prior to 1980, the concern of the legislature over the special danger imposed by gun crime was reflected in the provision of mandatory jail sentences to be applied for violations of HRS Chapter 134. “[S]evere penalties and incarceration” were deemed necessary “as the only meaningful method of stopping gun crimes.” Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 524, reprinted in 1971 Senate Journal at 1036. These mandatory terms of imprisonment, however, were inconsistent with the Penal Code and were not being applied by sentencing judges. Hse. Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 28-80, reprinted in 1980 House Journal at 1084; Sen. Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 30-80, reprinted in 1980 Senate Journal at 955. In view of this inconsistency, the legislature decided in 1980 to remove the mandatory penalties in Chapter 134, except as to § 134-8. The mandatory imprisonment provision for violating § 134-8 was retained because [t]he nature of prohibited weapons and related devices being of the type produced basically for the destruction of life and limb, are such that mandating a sentence of imprisonment is not unwarranted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Kane“Except as provided in section 706-606 and subject to the applicable provision of this Code, the court may suspend the imposition of sentence on a person who has been convicted of a crime[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Domingues
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.