Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 246 MISS 209 - Kennard v. State

Kennard v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
May 2004
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Lynd · Lang v. State · Konigsberg v. State Bar of California · Rogers v. Jones · 92 So. 2d 651 - Johnson v. State

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

  1. “Considering this application as one supplementary to a petition for writ of coram nobis, it does not fall within the ample due process standards of the Lang cases. The alleged newly-discovered evidence is cumulative and additional to that adduced at the trial on the identical issue of systematic exclusion. It would tend to impeach other testimony offered by Kennard himself at the trial. Application does not show that such evidence could not have been discovered by him, for presentation at the trial, by the exercise of due diligence; and it would certainly not render it practically conclusive or reasonably probable that a different result would follow on a re-hearing of this issue.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.