State v. Harrold’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably State v. Heywood (1989), State v. Hamilton (1987)
54 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 Commonwealth v. Riggins · State v. Buckner · State v. Richard · State v. Haines · State v. Dunham
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'one who pleads guilty or nolo contendere is not precluded by K.S.A. 22-3602 from taking a direct appeal from the sentence imposed.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““liberally construed to the end that persons convicted of crime shall be dealt with in accordance with their individual characteristics, circumstances, needs, and potentialities as revealed by case studies; that dangerous offenders shall be correctively treated in custody for long terms as needed; and that other offenders shall be dealt with by probation, suspended sentence, fine or assignment to a community correctional services program whenever such disposition appears practicable and not detrimental to the needs of public safety and the welfare of the offender, or shall be committed for at least a minimum tei-m within the limits provided by law.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'conviction' " in K.S.A. 21-3110 as " 'a judgment of guilt' "). Here, as in Harrold , the KORA issues are certainly not part of the judgment of conviction. Marinelli does not argue his conviction should be disturbed. In other words, our focus shifts to the first sentence of K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 22-3602(a) : "[A]n appeal ... may be taken by the defendant as a matter of right from any judgment against the defendant in the district court and upon appeal any decision of the district court or intermediate order made in the progress of the case may be reviewed.”
2 later decisions 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.