State v. Hooper’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

77 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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The determination of the question whether a prospective juror is qualified to sit in a case is a trial of that question to the court. (R. S. 62-1410). The trial court’s decision on that question will not be disturbed on appeal unless disqualification appears as a matter of law, or it is disclosed that there has been an abuse of the court’s discretion. (State v. Stewart, 85 Kan. 404 , 116 Pac. 489 .) ‘It is the mind of the court which must be satisfied that the challenged juror is free from bias and prejudice.’ (Morton v. The State, 1 Kan. 468, 472 .) (See, also, State v. Molz, 91 Kan. 901 , 139 Pac. 376 ; State v. Mullins, 95 Kan. 280 , syl. ¶ 6, 147 Pac. 828 ; State v. Tucker, 137 Kan. 84, 91 , 19 P. 2d 346 .””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Springer · State v. Williams

2. “. While our statutes contemplate the use of peremptory challenges on jurors qualified for cause, error in the court’s ruling on a challenge for cause, especially if the soundness of the ruling is seriously debatable, should not re- ' quire- a reversal of judgment of conviction, if in fact, as here, the defendant had a trial before an impartial jury.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Hoy · State v. Sagebiel

3. ““It shall be a good cause of challenge to a juror that he has formed or expressed an opinion on the issue or any material fact to be tried.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Springer · State v. Sagebiel