Hooper v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that, to avoid summary dismissal, a petitioner has the burden of providing the district court with factual reasons upon which it could conclude there was a sufficient reason for bringing the successive petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Smith v. State
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1996-08-14· cited 6×
• Nanney v. Linella, Inc.
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1997-07-30· cited 2×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Stuart v. State
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1990-11-28· cited 111×
• Palmer v. Dermitt
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1981-10-15· cited 88×
• State v. Hooper
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1991-02-12· cited 37×
• State v. Goodrich
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1983-03-10· cited 32×
• Conner v. Dake
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1982-09-03· cited 17×
• Farber v. Howell
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1986-06-25· cited 7×