State v. Kong’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently December 2021
13 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Baehr v. Lewin · State v. Santiago · State v. Nelson · 1 Haw. App. 60 - State v. Crowder
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen the defendant’s pretrial motion to suppress is denied and the evidence is subsequently introduced at trial, the defendant’s appeal of the denial of the motion to suppress is actually an appeal of the introduction of the evidence at trial. Consequently, when deciding an appeal of the pretrial denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress, the appellate court considers both the record of the hearing on the motion to suppress and the record of the trial. State v. Nakachi, 7 Haw.App. 28 , 33 n. 7, 742 P.2d 388 , 392 n. 7 (1987); State v. Uddipa, 3 Haw.App. 415, 416-17 , 651 P.2d 507, 509 (1982); State v. Crowder, 1 Haw.App. 60, 66-67 , 613 P.2d 909, 914 (1980).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“a defendant’s motion to suppress evidence is denied prior to trial, the defendant need not object at trial to the introduction of the evidence to preserve his or her right to appeal the pretrial denial of his or her motion to suppress and the introduction of the evidence at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Maldonado
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.