Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 Kan. App. 2d 779 - State v. Esher

22 Kan. App. 2d 779 - State v. Esher’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Larin-Ulloa v. Gonzales (2006), State v. Edwards (2006)

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

160199620002010decided

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 Ohio v. Johnson · Strong v. United States · In re Sturm · State v. Gonzales · State v. Hunter

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

  1. ““(a) Except as otherwise provided, a culpable mental state is an essential element of every crime defined by this code. A culpable mental state may be established by proof that the conduct of the accused person was committed ‘intentionally,’ ‘knowingly’ or ‘recklessly.’ “(b) Culpable mental states are classified according to relative degrees, from highest to lowest, as follows: (1) Intentionally; (2) knowingly; (3) recklessly. [[Image here]] “(f) If the definition of a crime prescribes a culpable mental state that is sufficient for the commission of a crime, without distinguishing among tire material elements thereof, such provision shall apply to all the material elements of the crime, unless a contrary purpose plainly appears. “(g) If the definition of a crime prescribes a culpable mental state with regard to a particular element or elements of that crime, the prescribed culpable mental state shall be required only as to specified element or elements, and a culpable mental state shall not be required as to any other element of the crime unless otherwise provided. “(h) A person acts ‘intentionally,’ or ‘with intent,’ with respect to the nature of such person’s conduct or to a result of such person’s conduct when it is such person’s conscious objective or deshe to engage in the conduct or cause the result. All crimes defined in this code in which the mental culpability requirement is expressed as ‘intentionally’ or ‘with intent’ are specific intent crimes. A crime may provide”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(a) Aggravated battery is: (1) (A) Intentionally causing great bodily harm to another person or disfigurement of another person; or (B) intentionally causing bodily harm to another person with a deadly weapon, or in any manner whereby great bodily harm, disfigurement or death can be inflicted; or (C) intentionally causing physical contact with another person when done in a rude, insulting or angry manner with a deadly weapon, or in any manner whereby great bodily harm, disfigurement or death can be inflicted; or (2) (A) recklessly causing great bodily harm to another person or disfigurement of another person; or (B) recklessly causing bodily harm to another person with a deadly weapon, or in any manner whereby great bodily harm, disfigurement or death can be inflicted.” K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-3414.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.