Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 210 Kan. 491 - State v. Ford

State v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently April 2024

16 state decisions

120197219801990200020102020decided

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 State v. Gauger · Thompson v. Norman · State v. Harden · State v. Jones · State v. Sorter

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

  1. ““. . . [FJreedom to impeach is subject to the qualification of K.S.A. 60- 422(b) that the impeaching statement ‘may in the discretion of the judge be excluded unless the witness was so examined while testifying as to give him an opportunity to identify, explain or deny the statement.’ . . .” (p. 496.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “his testimony at the first trial would have been incomplete at best”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “could well be viewed as an integral part of his testimony”
    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.