Johnson v. Hand’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
August 1968
most recently cited
2 district · 12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Richardson v. Hand · State v. O'CONNOR · State v. Lewis · Edwards v. Hudspeth · Crimi v. Hand
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is therefore apparent the sentence imposed by the trial court was in error, and, being in error, it is considered to be void under our decisions. Edwards v. Hudspeth, 159 Kan. 37 , 151 P. 2d 698 ; Richardson v. Hand, 182 Kan. 326 , 320 P. 2d 837 , and authorities cited therein.) . . . “Kansas has always considered an erroneous or irregular sentence the same as a void sentence, and thus within the power of a court to substitute a new and valid sentence. Under the circumstances this court may remand a prisoner for further proceedings in the district court to correct a void or erroneous sentence, . . .” (p. 104.)”
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.