17 Kan. App. 2d 512 - State v. Chandler’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2019
8 state decisions
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 In Re the Attorney General, Stephan · Hoffman v. Haug · State v. Williams · State v. Bressman · State v. Clemons
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.
“[W]here a defendant is related to the victim as set forth in K.S.A. 21-3603[1] [old aggravated incest statute], the State may charge the defendant with aggravated incest for engaging in the acts prohibited therein but not with indecent liberties with a child.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Toothman“A defendant charged with and convicted of aggravated incest, in violation of K.S.A. 21-3603, cannot also be charged with and convicted of aggravated criminal sodomy, in violation of K.S.A. 21-3506, where the facts alleged and proved establish”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Toothman“with a person who is under 18 years of age and who is known to the offender to be”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Toothman
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.