State v. Jagger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. ““Mere comment, however, is not a per se constitutional violation requiring reversal. Only error which fails to meet the federal standard of harmless error, defined as belief beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict, requires reversal. State v. Knapp, 234 Kan. 170 , Syl. ¶ 7, 671 P.2d 520 (1983). Thus, if there is a reasonable doubt as to whether the comment contributed to the verdict, the conviction should be reversed. “Although the above-mentioned rules are well defined, their application is more difficult. “To facilitate the determination of whether a prosecutor’s comments are harmless error, Kansas appellate courts consider the nature and extent of the comment in comparison with the strength of the evidence of the defendant’s guilt, and further consider whether the language used was manifestly intended or was of such character that the jury would naturally and necessarily take it to be a comment on the failure of the defendant to testify. Henderson, 226 Kan. at 736; accord State v. Ponds, 227 Kan. 627 , Syl. ¶ 4, 608 P.2d 946 (1980).” 11 Kan. App. 2d at 351-52 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Higgins

2. “" ‘That I think is the only point that is still in issue in this case, the defendant’s intention. We had no direct testimony about Mr. Jagger’s intention. Mr. Jagger is the only person who really knows of his own experience what his intention was.’” 11 Kan. App. 2d at 351 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Higgins