State v. Nunn’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

215 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 219 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Subject to K.S.A. 60-447 evidence that a person committed a crime or civil wrong on a specified occasion, is inadmissible to prove his or her disposition to commit crime or civil wrong as the basis for an inference that the person committed another crime or civil wrong on another specified occasion but, subject to K.S.A. 60-445 and 60-448 such evidence is admissible when relevant to prove some other material fact including motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident.””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 29 Kan. App. 2d 184 - State v. ALDABA, JR. · State v. Rucker

2. “[a]s to identical offenses, a defendant can only be sentenced under the lesser penalty.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Walker · State v. Thompson

3. ““Statutes of limitation are measures of public policy entirely subject to the will of the legislature.” Syl. ¶ 7. “While it is a general rule of statutory construction that a statute will operate prospectively unless its language clearly indicates the contrary, the rule is modified where the statutory change is merely procedural or remedial in nature and does not affect the substantive rights of the parties.” Syl. ¶ 8. “As related to criminal law and procedure, substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment therefor; whereas procedural law is that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is tried and punished.” Syl. ¶ 9. “Criminal statutes of limitation are remedial or procedural, not substantive, and may be applied retroactively.” Syl. ¶ 10. “Where a statute extends the period of limitation, the extension applies to offenses not barred on the effective date of the amendment so that a prosecution may be commenced at any time within the newly established period. Such an amendment, however, cannot operate to revive offenses that were barred at the time of its effective date, since that would make the statute ex post facto.” Syl. ¶ 11.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Noah · 14 Kan. App. 2d 609 - State v. Sylva