Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 Kan. 263 - Brewer v. Hudspeth

Brewer v. Hudspeth’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
March 1967
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miller v. Hudspeth · State v. Collins

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. ““From these salutary and humane principles this court has no desire to detract. They are justly designed for the protection of persons to be tried for crimes when they are incapacitated to properly defend themselves. On the other hand, they are not intended to furnish a technical means of nullifying just verdicts solemnly reached by judicial process. In order to reverse the trial court on the instant complaint we would be obliged to hold, as a matter of law, the record compelled the trial court to entertain a real doubt with respect to appellant’s sanity or capacity to make a proper defense. The question of such doubt addressed itself to the sound discretion of the trial court. It was the trial court in whose mind a real doubt of sanity or mental capacity to defend had to be created. . . .” (L. c. 39.)”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A supplemental affidavit of the district judge filed by respondent, in substance, discloses: . . he inquired of peace officers into the history and background of petitioner and was informed as follows: “ ‘Petitioner desired to enter his plea as soon as possible; that approximately thirty or thirty-five years ago and prior to the birth of petitioner the father of petitioner had escaped from a mental institution in the state of Missouri; that continuously since that escape the father had lived in Treece, Cherokee County, Kansas, had worked as a miner and had lived a normal life other than as previously stated; petitioner’s father and all of his brothers were high tempered, addicted to drinking and all of the male members of the family had been in trouble numerous times and had been convicted numerous times of various offenses including larceny, drunkenness and peace disturbance; several years ago an older brother of petitioner was shot and killed by a police officer in the performance of his duty; another older brother of petitioner had been inducted into the armed services of the United States during World War II .and had “cracked up” while in the service and following his discharge had been in various veterans’ hospitals due to a mental disorder.’ “The affidavit, in substance, further discloses affiant did not know the exact nature of the latter brother’s disorder but that his mental disability had been established as ‘service connected’; that petitioner was rejected by the ”
    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.