State v. Keeler’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
82 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably State v. Hall (1990), State v. Pabst (2000)
82 state decisions
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 Jackson v. Denno · Williams v. Florida · Taylor v. Kentucky · Baldwin v. New York Williams · Denison State Bank v. Madeira
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The degree of proof necessary in Kansas to establish a submissible issue of voluntary intoxication was considered in the recent case of State v. Keeler, 238 Kan. 356 , 710 P.2d 1279 (1985). The court stated: ‘Where the crime charged requires a specific intent, voluntary intoxication may be a defense and an instruction thereon is required where there is evidence to support that defense. [Citation omitted.] The defendant has the burden of showing that he was so intoxicated that he was robbed of his mental faculties, and whether he was drunk to such extent is a question for the trier of the facts to decide, under proper instructions. [Citations omitted.]’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Shehan · State v. Gonzales““The Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions recognized the problem in part and now PIK Crim. 2d 52.02 refers to a determination of ‘whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty’ rather than the earlier version which directs the jury to ‘determine the innocence or guilt of the defendant.’ ” 238 Kan. at 363 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Clark · State v. Johnson““It is the appellant’s position that, by using the words ‘innocent’ and ‘innocence,’ the jury may be misled as to the proper burden of proof. ... It is true that the defendant does not have to prove his innocence and that the burden is upon the State to prove a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Failure to do so requires a jury to find the defendant not guilty under the evidence; it does not require the jury to find the defendant is innocent. In the instant case the confusion between the terms not guilty and innocent is compounded by the court’s final instruction on the duty of the jury, which included: ‘You are instructed that your only consideration in this case is the guilt or innocence of the defendant.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Johnson
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.