23 Kan. App. 2d 935 - State v. Kriegh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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

1. ““As noted above, consent ‘must be given voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly.’ Johnson, 253 Kan. at 362. ‘[I]t must be clear that the search was permitted or invited by the individual whose rights are in question without duress or coercion.’ Crowder, 20 Kan. App. 2d at 120. ‘To be voluntary, the defendant’s consent must be “ ‘unequivocal and specific.’ ” ’ State v. Henry, 14 Kan. App. 2d 416, 420 , 792 P.2d 358 , rev. denied 247 Kan. 706 (1990). “ ‘In determining whether consent was voluntary, the trial court should consider whether the individual was threatened or coerced, and whether he was informed of his rights.’ Ruden, 245 Kan. at 105; cf. Schneckloth v. Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218, 248-49 , 36 L. Ed. 2d 854 , 93 S. Ct. 2041 (1973) (holding that a defendant’s knowledge of the right to refuse to consent is not a requirement for a valid consent, but is a factor to be considered). “ ‘Mere submission to lawful authority does not equate to consent, rather valid consent must be unequivocal and specific, and freely and intelligently given.’ U. S. v. Manuel, 992 F.2d 272, 275 (10th Cir. 1993) (citing Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 497 , 75 L. Ed. 2d 229 , 103 S. Ct. 1319 [1983]); cf. Johnson, 253 Kan. at 362-63.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jones