Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 212 Kan. 158 - State v. Larkin

State v. Larkin’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
2
states following
September 1991
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 1991 · most notably State v. Johnson (1977), State v. Richard (1984)

46 state decisions

300197319801990decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · People v. Savvides · United States v. Michael J. Gleeson, United States of America v. William A. Gleeson, United States of America v. Buck Garrett · State v. Hale

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. ““The law is well settled in this state that the granting of a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence rests largely in the discretion of the trial court, and such motion is ordinarily not granted unless the trial court is satisfied that such new evidence would probably produce a different verdict. The credibility of the evidence offered in support of the motion is for the trial court’s consideration. (State v. Law, 203 Kan. 89 , 452 P.2d 862 ; United States v. Gleeson, 411 F.2d 1091 ; State v. Hale, 206 Kan. 521 , 479 P.2d 902 ; and State v. Campbell, 207 Kan. 152 , 483 P.2d 495 .) “It has also been held where a new trial is sought on the basis of recanting testimony of a prosecution witness, the weight to be given such testimony is for the trial judge passing on the motion for a new trial. (State v. Theus, 207 Kan. 571 , 485 P.2d 1327 .)” Larkin, supra, p. 161 .”
    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.