Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 242 Kan. 834 - State v. Riedel

State v. Riedel’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2015

18 state decisions

601988199020002010decided

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 State v. Quick · State v. Jackson · Brown v. Hardin · State v. Owen · 5 Kan. App. 2d 371 - State v. Boling

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

  1. ““We think Judge Russell, as the judge actually presiding at the trial, acted properly in determining she should make the final determination as to the admissibility of evidence at the trial, even though there had been an earlier ruling on the same evidence at a pretrial motion hearing. While in most cases district judges should be reluctant to rehear an issue decided earlier in the proceedings, reconsideration of such an issue lies within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Reconsideration of earlier pretrial rulings, when necessary to prevent prejudice and assure the parties a fair trial, cannot be said to be an abuse of the trial court’s broad discretion. Cf. State v. Quick, 226 Kan. 308 , 597 P.2d 1108 (1979). No abuse of discretion on the part of Judge Russell has been shown in this case.” 242 Kan. at 838.”
    1 later decision 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.