State v. Lash’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

64 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[T]he opinion testimony of experts on the ultimate issue or issues [ cf. I.R.E. 704] is not admissible without limitations. Such testimony is admissible only insofar as the opinion will aid the jury in the interpretation of technical facts or when it will assist the jury in understanding the material in evidence... . Where the normal experience and qualifications of lay jurors permit them to draw proper conclusions from given facts and circumstances, expert conclusions or opinions are inadmissible." 699 P.2d at 51 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Jackson · State v. Hester

2. “"An expert's opinion in a proper case is admissible up to the point where an expression of opinion would require him to pass upon the credibility of witnesses or the weight of disputed evidence." 239 Kan. 463 , Syl. ¶ 8.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Clements · State v. Brodniak

3. “"In the case now before us, the alleged victim was fifteen years of age and testified before the jury. The defendant, likewise, testified and denied any acts constituting indecent liberties with his son. In this case, when the prosecutor asked the psychologist to give his expert opinion as to whether the alleged victim had been sexually molested by his father, the prosecutor, in effect, was asking the expert for his opinion as to whether the son was telling the truth that his father was his molester. The question clearly was improper, since such an expression of opinion would require the expert to pass upon the credibility of witnesses or the weight of disputed evidence. Under the circumstances shown in the record in this case, we hold that the district court did not err in its ruling that the psychologist could not testify before the jury as to his expert opinion that the alleged victim had been sexually molested by the defendant, his father." 237 Kan. at 386 .”

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