State v. Magness’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

49 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs. State v. Cole, 238 Kan. 370, 371 , 710 P.2d 25 (1985). When a penal statute is questioned, the court is required to strictly construe the act in favor of the accused. State v. Cole, 238 Kan. at 372 . However, this rule- of strict construction concerning penal statutes is subordinate to the rule that judicial interpretation must be reasonable and sensible to effectuate legislative design and intent. State v. Fowler, 238 Kan. 213, 215 , 708 P.2d 539 (1985). Words in common usage are to be given their natural and ordinary meaning. State v. Magness, 240 Kan. 719 , 732 P.2d 747 (1987); Szoboszlay v. Glessner, 233 Kan. 475, 478 , 664 P.2d 1327 (1983).””

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

2. ““(a) ‘Juvenile’ means a person 10 or more years of age but less than 18 years of age. “(b) ‘Juvenile offender’ means a person who does an act while a juvenile which if done by an adult would constitute the commission of a felony or misdemeanor as defined by K.S.A. 21-3105 and amendments thereto or who violates the provisions of K.S.A. 41-715 or 41-2721, and amendments thereto, but does not include: (3) a person 16 years of age or over who is charged with a felony or with more than one offense of which one or more is a felony after having been adjudicated in two separate prior juvenile proceedings as having committed an act which would constitute a felony if committed by an adult and the adjudications occurred prior to the date of the commission of the new act charged.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 24 Kan. App. 2d 242 - State v. Fultz

3. ““The purpose of the juvenile offenders code is to provide an alternative to prosecuting a juvenile under the Kansas Criminal Code. The legislature requires that the juvenile offenders code be liberally construed to provide each juvenile coming within its provision with ‘care, custody, guidance, control and discipline’ that will best serve the offender’s rehabilitation and the protection of society. K.S.A. 38-1601; Findlay v. State, 235 Kan. 462, 681 P.2d 20 (1984); Lennon v. State, 193 Kan. 685 , 396 P.2d 290 (1964). A liberal construction of K.S.A. 38-1602(b)(3), particularly in light of the Judicial Council’s comments, supports the ruling of the trial judge.” 240 Kan. at 723 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 24 Kan. App. 2d 242 - State v. Fultz