Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 Kan. 310 - State v. Shaffer

State v. Shaffer’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
April 2002
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 2002

14 state decisions

100198119902000decided

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 Rust v. Johnson · State v. Wilkins · United States v. Cuesta · State v. Sullivan & Sullivan · State v. Myrick & Nelms

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

  1. “. . . during reasonable attempts to either maintain or restore circulatory or respiratory function in the absence of spontaneous function, it appears that further attempts at resuscitation or supportive maintenance will not succeed . . . (Emphasis supplied)/' Succeed at what? Based on the medical testimony, Ms. Fredella's heart and lung functions could have been maintained for an indefinite period of time on supportive maintenance. The fact that medical technology may maintain heart and lung functions does not, however, preclude a legal determination of death. Courts which have considered this terminology have read into it the phrase "... in restoring such [brain] functions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In any prosecution, the court upon motion of the defendant shall order that the case be transferred as to him to another county or district if the court is satisfied that there exists in the county where the prosecution is pending so great a prejudice against the defendant that he cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial in that county.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “... absence of spontaneous brain function. . .”
    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.