Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 Haw. 492 - State v. Lagat

State v. Lagat’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 2021

1 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

130200220102020decided

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 Russell v. United States · Garcia v. United States · Hartman v. United States · State v. Jendrusch · Keliipuleole v. Wilson

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

  1. “The commentary to HRS § 708-836.5 states, “Act 87, Session Laws 1996, added this section to the penal code and made the offense of unauthorized entry into motor vehicle a class C felony due to the increased number of car thefts in the State.” Also, HRS § 708-836.5 is found in HRS chapter 708, “Offenses Against Property Rights,” under Part IV, “Theft and Related Offenses.” These legislative choices, specifically the overt commentary to the UEMV statute, suggest the legislature had a very specific purpose in mind when enacting the UEMV statute. Any general application of the statute, -without requiring that [the defendant’s] criminal conduct be related to theft, would not only exceed the bounds of the statute’s stated purpose, but would unnecessarily “trump” other statutes, [such as our second degree burglary statute].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.