State v. Spears’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Defendant is charged in Count I with the crime of Unlawful Acts in Connection with the Offer, Sale, or Purchase of Securities. The defendant pleads not guilty. “To establish this charge, each of the following claims must be proved: “1. That the defendant did one or more of the following: “a. willfully and intentionally employed a device, scheme or artifice to defraud Monty [Menhusen]; or, “b. willfully made an untrue statement of material fact, or omitted to state a material fact; or, “c. engaged in an act, practice, [or] course of business which would operate as a fraud upon Monty [Menhusen]. “2. That the unlawful act occurred in connection with a sale of percentage of the General Partnership Interest in Emporia Street Limited Partnership, to Monty [Menhusen]. “3. That the general partnership interest sold to Monty [Menhusen] was a security. “4. That if the unlawful act was an omission to state a material fact, that the material fact was necessary in order to make other statements made to Monty [Menhusen], in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and “5. That the act occurred on or about the 17th day of June, 1985, in Sedgwick County, Kansas.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 15 Kan. App. 2d 734 - State v. Ribadeneira

2. ““The law is well settled in this state that, in a crime of violence which results in death, photographs which serve to illustrate the nature and extent of the wounds inflicted are admissible when they corroborate the testimony of witnesses or are relevant to the testimony of a pathologist as to the cause of death, even though they may appear gruesome. [Citations omitted.]” State v. Spears, 246 Kan. 283, 286 , 788 P.2d 261 (1990). “The admission of photographs as evidence in a homicide case rests within the trial court’s discretion, and that court’s ruling will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse of discretion. [Citations omitted.]” State v. Mayberry, 248 Kan. 369, 383 , 807 P.2d 86 (1991). “An abuse of discretion may be reached if the admitted photographs were unduly repetitious and cumulative or their introduction was solely for the purpose of prejudice. [Citation omitted.]” Spears , 246 Kan at 286.”

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

3. “A person who would otherwise have a privilege to refuse to disclose or to prevent another from disclosing a specified matter has no such privilege with respect to that matter if the judge finds that such person or any other person while the holder of the privilege has (a) contracted with a party against whom the privilege is claimed that he or she would not claim the privilege or, (b) without coercion, or without any trickery, deception, or fraud practiced against him or her, and with knowledge of the privilege, made disclosure of any part of the matter or consented to such a disclosure made by anyone.”

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