Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 202 Kan. 475 - State v. Walker

State v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
4
states following
July 1989
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 1989 · most notably State v. Bell (1977), State v. Ruscoe (1989)

36 state decisions

260196919701980decided

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 Tibbett v. Hand · Merry Manufacturing Co. v. Burns Tool Co. · State v. Emory · Ray v. State · State v. Rice

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

  1. “. An indigent defendant may not compel the court to appoint such counsel as defendant may choose. Such appointment lies within the sound discretion of the trial court . . Likewise, whether the dissatisfaction of an indigent accused with his court-appointed counsel warrants discharge of that counsel and appointment of new counsel is for the trial court, in its discretion, to decide”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Appellant contends the trial court erred in receiving in evidence the items seized at appellant’s apartment because the warrants were not constitutionally specific as to the premises to be searched or the property to be seized. As to the latter, the affidavit for the search warrant and the search warrant described the property to be seized as ‘cooking utensils,’ which we think was sufficient. . . .” (479.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““. . . Likewise, whether the dissatisfaction of an indigent accused with his court-appointed counsel warrants discharge of that counsel and appointment of new counsel is for the trial court, in its discretion, to decide. . . .” (p. 477).”
    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.