Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 Haw. 434 - State v. Freeman

State v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2020

16 state decisions

10019891990200020102020decided

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. Feliciano · State v. Pia · State v. Hoopii · State v. Kupau · State v. Woicek

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

  1. “[The kidnapping and rape/sodomy] statutes do not seek to redress the same conduct. The main thrust of the kidnapping statute is to prohibit the intentional restraint of another’s freedom of movement. The additional requirement of intent merely serves to distinguish kidnapping from unlawful imprisonment. See Commentary on §§ 707-720 to 707-722. Meanwhile, the rape and sodomy statutes are primarily concerned with preventing another from being forced to engage in sexual acts. Rape and sodomy, therefore, are not derivatives of kidnapping.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “§ 701-109 Method of prosecution when conduct establishes an element of more than one offense. (1) When the same conduct of a defendant may establish an element of more than one offense, the defendant may be prosecuted for each offense of which such conduct is an element. The defendant may not, however, be convicted of more than one offense if: ⅜ ⅜ ⅜ ⅜ ⅞! (d) 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[.]”
    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.