10 Kan. App. 2d 651 - State v. Perrigo’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
December 2001
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Pham · United States v. Silverstein · State v. McCorgary · State v. Marquez · State v. Folkerts
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When determining whether prosecutorial misconduct was prejudicial, factors that should be considered include: (1) Is the misconduct so gross and flagrant as to deny the accused a fair trial? (2) Do the remarks show ill will on the prosecutor’s part? (3) Is the evidence against the defendant of such a direct and overwhelming nature that the misconduct would likely have little weight in the minds of the jurors? [Citation omitted.]” State v. Perrigo, 10 Kan. App. 2d 651, 654 , 708 P.2d 987 (1985).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.