Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 209 Kan. 681 - State v. Edwards

State v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

2 district · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably 9 Kan. App. 2d 659 - Allegri v. Providence-St. Margaret Health Center (1984), State v. Dunn (1988)

2 district · 44 state decisions

200197219801990200020102020decided

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 Evans v. United States · State v. Turner · State v. Jackson · State v. Parker · State v. Shaw

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

  1. ““(1) A person is criminally responsible for a crime committed by another if he intentionally aids, abets, advises, hires, counsels or procures the other to commit the crime. “(2) A person liable under subsection (1) hereof is also liable for any other crime committed in pursuance of the intended crime if reasonably foreseeable by him as a probable consequence of committing or attempting to commit the crime intended. “(3) A person liable under this section may be charged with and convicted of the crime although the person alleged to have directly committed the act constituting the crime lacked criminal capacity or has not been convicted or has been acquitted or has been convicted of some other degree of the crime or of some other crime based on the same act.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"The existence of criminal intent in aiding or abetting another to commit a crime may be presumed or inferred from circumstances surrounding the perpetration of the crime and is a fact question for jury determination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““K. S. A. 1971 Supp. 21-3205, effective July 1, 1970, which holds a person criminally responsible if he intentionally aids or abets another to commit a crime makes no change in the degree of proof of intent necessary to establish criminal responsibility. The element of intent necessary to establish and support criminal responsibility for aiding or abetting another to commit a crime may be inferred from circumstantial evidence. Cases in support there of are State v. Jackson, 201 Kan. 795 , 443 P. 2d 279 , cert. den. 394 U. S. 908 , 22 L. Ed. 2d 219, 89 S. Ct. 1019 ; State v. Turner, 193 Kan. 189 , 392 P. 2d 863 ; and State v. Sharp, 202 Kan. 644 , 451 P. 2d 137 .” (p. 685.)”
    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.