Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 Kan. 312 - State v. Sanford

State v. Sanford’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
February 2005
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2005

8 state decisions

40198519902000decided

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 State v. Bly · State v. Faulkner · State v. Hobson · State v. Pham · State v. Ritson

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

  1. ““In a criminal action, when the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, the standard of review on appeal is whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, convinces the appellate court that a rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellate court looks only to the evidence in favor of the verdict to determine if the essential elements of the charge are sustained. State v. Pham, 234 Kan. at 667-68; State v. Douglas, 230 Kan. 744, 745-46 , 640 P.2d 1259 (1982).””
    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.