State v. Augustine’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

cited by 39 later decisions

states following

October 2005

most recently cited

2 district · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently October 2005 · most notably 87 Wash. 2d 922 - Johnson v. Morris (1976), 288 So. 2d 490 - Bernhardt v. State (1974)

2 district · 37 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 Jones v. Garrett · Ellis v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. · State Ex Rel. Londerholm v. Owens · State v. Fountaine · State v. Brown

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

“"As related to criminal law and procedure, substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment therefor, while procedural law is that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is punished. See State v. Augustine, 197 Kan. 207 , 416 P.2d 281 (1966)." (p. 238)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 111 Wis. 2d 175 - In Matter of EB · State v. Lagundoye
““Whether an offense committed by a male person sixteen or seventeen years of age constitutes a delinquent or a criminal act depends upon the jurisdictional limits of the juvenile court. A change in those limits results in an offense either losing or acquiring the element of criminality. Therefore, we have no difficulty concluding that the enlargement of juvenile court jurisdiction to include sixteen- and seventeen-year-old males constituted a change in substantive law.” 197 Kan. at 210 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 30 Kan. App. 2d 64 - State v. Jarvis
““A legislative enactment which enlarges tire jurisdictional age limits of the juvenile court to include sixteen- and seventeen-year-old male persons constitutes a change in the substantive law, and will not be construed as having retroactive application to' cases pending on the effective date of the act in the absence of language disclosing a contrary legislative intent.” (Syl. ¶ 2.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. State v. Coutcher

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.