Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 165 Ariz. 503 - State v. Kinslow

State v. Kinslow’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 2020

1 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

801990200020102020decided

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 United States v. Bailey · State v. Dawson · State v. Avila · State v. Draper · State v. Jones

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

  1. “A, Conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justified if a reasonable person would believe that he was compelled to engage in the proscribed conduct by the threat or use of immediate physical force against his person or the person of another which resulted or could result in serious physical injury which a reasonable person in the situation would not have resisted.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The dissent suggests that we set aside the stipulation as illegal, reverse the convictions, and remand this case for reinstatement of the original 19 felony counts. Even if we had the jurisdiction to do so, which Dawson clearly establishes we do not, the result of such a disposition in this case would be to subject the victims to further emotional harm. The record indicates that one reason the state agreed to stipulate here was to prevent the psychological devastation that would result if this family had to testify regarding defendant’s acts, which included the rapes of the mother and the 11-year-old child during the course of the family’s kidnapping. In light of the technical nature of the sentencing errors, we cannot agree that such a disposition, with its resulting harm to the victims, would be the appropriate remedy in any event. See, e.g., State v. Draper, 162 Ariz. 433, 440 , 784 P.2d 259 , [2]66 (1989) (public policy favors protection of victims from harm and trauma).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]f there was a reasonable, legal alternative to violating the law, 'a chance both to refuse to do the criminal act and also to avoid the threatened harm,' the defenses [of duress and necessity] will fail.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.