Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 161 KAN 230 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably State v. Hunter (1987), State v. Childers (1977)

50 state decisions

12019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 State v. Severns · State v. Keehn · Reed v. State · State v. Gloyd · State v. Phelps

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

  1. ““In those cases where self defense is invoked by the proof we conclude it is the duty of the court to charge the jury on that issue irrespective of whether there has been a request for an instruction, regardless of whether counsel has been called upon and failed to formulate a theory on which it could be given, and notwithstanding such counsel has stated he believes its submission rests in the court’s discretion. “Our conclusion is not unsupported by the authorities. In 41 C.J.S. 163, 164, 165, § 375, it is said: ‘As a general rule, where self-defense is involved and there is any evidence, although slight, to establish it, it is proper for, as well as the duty of, the court to instruct the jury fully and clearly on all phases of the law of self-defense that are warranted by the evidence, even though such defense is supported only by accused’s own testimony, or accused denies the killing or participation in the homicide; and it has also been held that such an instruction is proper even though no issue of self-defense is raised. Where such an instruction is necessary and proper under the issues and evidence in the case, a failure or refusal to give it constitutes error . . . .’ ” (Emphasis added.) 161 Kan. at 237 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In a prosecution for a homicide, where there is substantial evidence tending to show that the accused acted in self-defense, the fact that he denies having committed the act which caused the death is not necessarily a ground for refusing to submit to the jury the question whether the killing was justifiable.” Syl.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In prosecutions for homicide it is the duty of the trial court to instruct the jury, not only as to the offense charged but as to all lesser offenses of which the accused might be found guilty under the information and upon the evidence adduced, even though such instructions have not been requested or have been objected to." (Syl. ¶ 3.)”
    1 later decision 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.