Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 Kan. App. 2d 445 - Ramirez v. State

23 Kan. App. 2d 445 - Ramirez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 2014

10 state decisions

50199720002010decided

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 Sandin v. Conner · Palmer v. Brown · In re Jantz · Murphy v. Nelson · 12 Kan. App. 2d 183 - Swisher v. Hamilton

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

  1. ““Kansas courts will not review an inmate’s claim that he or she was placed in either administrative or disciplinary segregation unless the Due Process Clause has been violated. The threshold test to determine a violation of due process is whether the state laws and regulations structuring the authority of prison officials contain language of an unmistakably mandatory character requiring that certain procedures must be employed and that punishment will not occur absent specified substantive predicates. If this threshold test is met, we examine whether the discipline imposed represents a significant and atypical hardship on the prisoner which was not contemplated within the realm of conditions of the original sentence. If it does not, there is no due process violation.” Amos v. Nelson, 260 Kan 652, Syl. ¶ 4, 923 P.2d 1014 (1996).”
    1 later decision 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.