State v. Buckner’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
104 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently May 2009 · most notably State v. Holmes (2004), State v. McDaniel & Owens (1980)
104 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 Brinegar v. United States · Lego v. Twomey · Commonwealth v. Riggins · State v. Lamb · State v. Steward
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) The defendant’s history of prior criminal activity; (b) The extent of the harm caused by the defendant’s criminal conduct; (c) Whether the defendant intended that his criminal conduct would cause or threaten serious harm; (d) The degree of the defendant’s provocation; (e) Whether there were substantial grounds tending to excuse or justify the defendant’s criminal conduct, though failing to establish a defense; (f) Whether the victim of the defendant’s criminal conduct induced or facilitated its commission; (g) Whether the defendant has compensated or will compensate the victim of his criminal conduct for the damage or injury that he sustained.” K.S.A. 21-4606(2).”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The legislature has dictated, in K.S.A. 21-4606, certain minimum factors to be considered in imposing sentence. Although the statute may not require it, we feel that when the sentence exceeds the minimum, it is better practice for the trial court to make, as part of the record, a detailed statement of the facts and factors considered by the court in imposing sentence. Such a record would be of great assistance to the appellate courts in determining whether the trial court has abused its discretion." 223 Kan. at 151.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The existence and voluntariness of a consent to search and seizure is a question of fact to be decided in light of attendant circumstances by the trial court and will not be overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous. (State v. Jakeway, 221 Kan. 142, 146 , 558 P.2d 113 , and authorities cited therein.)” 223 Kan. at 144.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Alexander
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.