Hunter v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
August 2017
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell · 174 Ind. App. 501 - State v. Dossett · Wilcox v. State · Mitchell v. Mitchell · Moore v. Ferguson
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The coercive, rather than punitive, nature of the Contempt Court's handling of the matter is evident. Had the court simply intended to punish Hunter for his past failure to pay support for [his children}, it would have sentenced Hunter to jail without permitting alternatives to incarceration and without conditioning the sentence. Because the purpose of the Contempt Court's sanction was coercion, not punishment, the subsequent criminal charges regarding nonsupport of [the children] do not constitute double jeopardy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. State“incidental punitive aspects of Hunter's contempt sentence, we agree with the Criminal Court that the sentence was designed (and redesigned) by the Contempt Court to coerce Hunter into compliance with the child support orders.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. State
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.