Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 Kan. 285 - State v. Martin

State v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
March 2005
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2005 · most notably State v. Haislip (1985), State v. Wagner (1991)

32 state decisions

260198519902000decided

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 Carpenter v. United States · Stayton v. Stayton · State v. Weigel · State v. Richard · State v. Braun

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

  1. ““Judicial discretion is abused when judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable, which is another way of saying that discretion is abused only when no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court. If reasonable persons could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then it cannot be said that the trial court abused its discretion. All judicial discretion must thus be considered as exercisable only within the bounds of reason and justice in the broader sense, and only to be abused when it plainly overpasses those bounds.” State v. Martin, 237 Kan. 285 , Syl. ¶ 2, 699 P.2d 486 (1985).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Motive “The State argues that evidence of gang membership was relevant to establish Hieu’s motive for the crime. Following the fight inside the skating rink, Corby Turner heard a group of three to five Vietnamese males talking about the incident. Turner heard the people in the group say ‘they were gonna get even and they knew how they were gonna do it.’ According to the State, Turner’s conversation established a link between the fight in the skating rink and the fight in the parking lot that lead to Toan’s death. The motivation or desire to ‘get even’ with the Trans, who were involved in the arrest of Jimmy Nguyen, a member of the Local Boys, led to the confron tation in the parking lot. Hieu was a participant in the fight in the parking lot. Hieu made sure the gang retaliated with the Trans when he shot Toan in the back of the head. “Officer Carey testified that if someone got a member of the gang in trouble, the gang would retaliate. Absent evidence of gang affiliation, the jury would wonder why Hieu felt the need to get even with the Tran brothers. Again, evidence of gang affiliation established an alliance among Jimmy, who started the initial fight inside the skating rink; Kevin, who started the fight in the parking lot; and Hieu, who fired the shot that killed Toan. Without evidence of gang affiliation, the State’s attempt to establish a motive for the crime would have been impeded. . “The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed the State to present rel”
    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.