Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 Kan. 368 - State v. Garnes

State v. Garnes’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
3
states following
April 2006
most recently cited

107 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently April 2006 · most notably State v. Schoonover (2006), State v. Hobson (1983)

107 state decisions

420198119902000decided

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 California v. Arizona · State v. Voiles · State v. Fisher · State v. Rueckert · State v. Dorsey

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

  1. ““(1) A single offense may not be divided into separate parts; generally, a single wrongful act may not furnish the basis for more than one criminal prosecution. (2) If each offense charged requires proof of a fact not required in proving the other, the offenses do not merge. (3) Where offenses are committed separately and severally, at different times and at different places, they cannot be said to arise out of a single wrongful act.””
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of evidence, this court's standard of review is whether, after review of all of the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the appellate court is convinced that a rational jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation omitted.]”
    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.