State v. Bishop’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 72 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We held a charge of aggravated assault to be multiplicitous with kidnapping in State v. Racey, 225 Kan. 404, 408 , 590 P.2d 1064 - (1979), and rape in State v. Lassley, 218 Kan. 758, 761-62 , 545 P.2d 383 (1976). In both cases, however, the court found a single, continuous act. In Lassley , the victim was accosted in the living room of a home where she was babysitting. Lassley ordered her outside, grabbed her by the hair, pushed her down an alley, held a knife to her throat, took her to some nearby shrubs and raped her. We held that the defendant’s conduct constituted a single continuous transaction, a situation where there was a continuous act of force oh the part of the defendant. We distinguished that case from State v. James, 216 Kan. 235 , 531 P.2d 70 (1975), where there was a break in the action — an assault at one place and a subsequent rape at another. The facts in Racey are somewhat similar to those in Lassley . Racey continually threatened the victim with a gun throughout the entire sequence of events. There was one continuing unbroken act of force. Thus, we concluded that Racey could not be convicted of both aggravated assault and kidnapping.” 240 Kan. at 653-54.”

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

2. ““The trial court has an affirmative duty to instruct the jury on all lesser included offenses established by the evidence. See K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 21-3107(3). This duty arises, however, only when there is evidence under which the defendant may reasonably be convicted of the lesser offense.” State v. Bishop, 240 Kan. 647, 654-55 , 732 P.2d 765 (1987) (citing State v. Everson, 229 Kan. 540, 542 , 626 P.2d 1189 [1981]).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 12 Kan. App. 2d 191 - State v. Adams

3. ““The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Section 15 of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution are identical for all practical purposes. If conduct is prohibited by the one, it is prohibited by the other.””

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