State v. Wonser’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably State v. Nunn (1989), State v. Jackson (1986)
26 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 State v. Osbey · State v. Childs · State v. Platz · State v. Rider · State v. Sharp
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This court has held on numerous occasions that the precise time of the commission of an offense need not be stated in the indictment or information. Except where the time is an indispensable ingredient of the offense, it is sufficient if shown to have been within the statute of limitations. (State v. Bowman, 106 Kan. 430 , 188 Pac. 242 ; State v. Freeman, 143 Kan. 315 , 55 P.2d 362 ; State v. Thomas, 177 Kan. 230 , 277 P.2d 577 .) Time was not an indispensable ingredient of the crime charged and the crime was shown to have been well within the statute of limitations. Time had nothing to do with the nature and cause of the accusation.” 217 Kan. at 407 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“were simply designating the act by its common name”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Pernell
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.