24 Kan. App. 2d 260 - State v. Guebara’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 4 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The jury could have found, under the facts of this case, that the minivan was not used as a deadly weapon. Nevertheless, it still could have found that Guebara recklessly or intentionally caused bodily harm to Whitt [the flag person], thus supplying the necessary elements of battery. The State argues that Guebara s only defense at trial was that nothing had happened. While this may be true, the evidence presented by the State would be sufficient to convict Guebara of simple battery if the jury found that the minivan was not used as a deadly weapon in this situation.” 24 Kan. App. 2d at 263 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 27 Kan. App. 2d 597 - State v. Bradford

2. ““A deadly weapon is an instrument which, from the manner in which it is used, is calculated or likely to produce death or serious bodily injury. “An ordinary object used in a deadly manner can be a deadly weapon.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 27 Kan. App. 2d 597 - State v. Bradford