State v. Carvalho’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 2023
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 Fertel-Rust v. Dane County Social Services · Krishnamurthy v. Nimmagadda · State v. Reynolds · Baehr v. Lewin · Magill v. Evans
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.
“... We answer questions of constitutional law “by exercising our own independent judgment based on the facts of the case.” State v. Trainor, 83 Hawai'i 250, 255 , 925 P.2d 818, 823 (1996) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); State v. Lee, 83 Hawai'i 267, 273 , 925 P.2d 1091, 1097 (1996) (citation, internal quotation marks, and brackets omitted). Thus, we review questions of constitutional law under the “right/wrong” standard. See State v. Toyomura, 80 Hawai'i 8, 15 , 904 P.2d 893, 900 (1995) (citing State v. Higa, 79 Hawai'i 1, 3 , 897 P.2d 928, 930 (1995), and State v. Gaylord, 78 Hawai'i 127, 137 , 890 P.2d 1167, 1177 (1995)); State v. Baranco, 77 Hawai'i 351, 355 , 884 P.2d 729, 733 (1994) (issue whether defendant’s constitutional right against double jeopardy would be violated unless indictment dismissed is question of law, reviewed under right/wrong standard); In re [John] Doe, Born on January 5, 1976, 76 Hawai'i 85, 93 , 869 P.2d 1304, 1312 (1994) (whether speech is protected by first amendment to United States Constitution is applied to states through fourteenth amendment and by article I, section 4 of Hawai'i Constitution are questions freely reviewable on appeal).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Staley · State v. Gomes“A prime reason for allowing a defendant the right of allocution is to provide the defendant an opportunity to plead for mitigation of the sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hernandez.“opportunity to affect the totality of the trial court's sentencing determination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hernandez.
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.