State v. Sanders’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently April 1997 · most notably State v. Dubish (1984), State v. Chiles (1979)
47 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 Alexander v. Louisiana · Whitus v. State of Georgia Whitus · Avery v. State of Georgia · 22 Cal. 3d 333 - People v. Drew · State v. Lamb
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is a rare occasion when an insanity question should be taken from a jury by a motion for acquittal. [Citation omitted.] The test for taking the issue of insanity away from the jury was adopted by this court in State v. Chase, 206 Kan. 352, 362 , 480 P.2d 62 (1971). In order to remove the case from the jury’s consideration on the basis of the evidence, reasonable men must necessarily possess a reasonable doubt as to defendant’s sanity and must conclude that the government has failed to sustain its burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had the capacity to commit the crime. Dusky v. United States, 295 F.2d 743, 756 (8th Cir. 1961).””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Lawton · State v. Taylor“"The testimony of medical experts that an accused was legally insane at the time of a criminal act is not conclusive merely because it is not disputed by other medical testimony. The testimony of nonexpert witnesses who observed the actions of the accused immediately before, during and after the criminal act may be considered by a jury along with testimony of expert witnesses."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Pioletti · State v. Baker““[Ajlthough a black defendant does not have the right to demand that members of his race be included on a jury (State v. Jordan, 220 Kan. 110, 114 , 551 P.2d 773 [1976]), the defendant has a right to require that the state not deliberately and systematically deny to members of his race the right to participate as jurors in the administration of justice. Alexander v. Louisiana, 405 U.S. 625, 628-29 , 31 L.Ed.2d 536 , 92 S.Ct. 1221 (1972).” State v. Sanders, 225 Kan. 147, 148-149 , 587 P.2d 893 (1978).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Taylor
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.