State v. Irons’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[W]hen an application is made to admit evidence of a prior offense of which defendant has been acquitted, an additional consideration presents itself—die possibility of collateral estoppel. “When an issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final verdict or judgment that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit under the rule of collateral estoppel. [Citations omitted.] “The rule of collateral estoppel in criminal cases is not to be applied widi a hypertechnical approach, but with realism and rationality. Where a previous judgment of acquittal is based upon a general verdict diis approach requires a court to examine the record of the prior proceeding, taking into account die pleadings, evidence, charge and other relevant matter, and if the court concludes a rational jury would have had to base its verdict of acquittal on the same issue which the State seeks to prove by introducing evidence of a prior offense then collateral estoppel applies. [Citations omitted.!” Irons, 230 Kan. at 143-44 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. King