State v. Ulriksen’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2009
10 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Bumper v. North Carolina · State v. Oswald · State v. Boyle · State v. Ogden
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is established that the jurisdiction of a district court in Kansas to try a person fora criminal ofíense does not depend on how he came to be in the state. (State v. Wellman, 102 Kan. 503 , 170 Pac. 1052 ; Stebens v. Hand, 182 Kan. 304 , 320 P.2d 790 ; Converse v. Hand, 185 Kan. 112 , 340 P.2d 874 ; Smith v. State, 196 Kan. 438 , 411 P.2d 663 ; Thompson v. State, 197 Kan. 630 , 419 P.2d 891 ; State v. Eaton, 199 Kan. 610 , 433 P.2d 347 ; Yurk & Brady v. Brunk, 202 Kan. 755 , 451 P.2d 230 ; and Bruffett v. State, 205 Kan. 863 , 472 P.2d 206 .)” p. 799.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. McCowan
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.