Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 230 Kan. 482 - State v. Schlicher

State v. Schlicher’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably State v. Bird (1985), State v. Henry (1997)

25 state decisions

1201982199020002010decided

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 United States v. Marion · State v. Gauger · State v. Sanders · State v. Martin · State v. Robinson, Lloyd & Clark

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

  1. ““(1) the burden of proof is on defendant, (2) not only prejudice must be shown but it must be such prejudice as to make it reasonably certain the defendant cannot obtain a fair trial, (3) there must be more than speculation, (4) the state is not required to produce evidence refuting that of the defendant, and (5) granting a change of venue lies within the sound discretion of the trial court and its ruling will not be disturbed if supported by competent evidence and if there is no showing of prejudice to the substantial rights of the defendant.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Where an impeaching statement is written, and the witness, although admitting that he gave a statement, cannot remember the contents thereof or denies the same, the statement itself or at least the impeaching portion thereof should be admitted into evidence.” “Where a witness admits having made the contradictory statement, the witness is thereby impeached and further testimony or admission of the statement is ordinarily not necessary. It may be admitted, however, in the trial court’s discretion, provided some good reason for its admission is shown.” Syl. ¶¶ 4 & 5.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““As affecting the credibility of a witness ...(b) extrinsic evidence of prior contradictory statements, whether oral or written, made by the witness, may in the discretion of the judge be excluded unless the witness was so examined while testifying as to give him or her an opportunity to identify, explain or deny the statement . . .”
    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.