State v. Mayberry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 128 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 130 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Probable cause is the reasonable belief that a specific crime has been committed and that the defendant committed the crime. It does not require evidence of each element of the crime or evidence to the degree necessary to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. State t). Abu-Isba, 235 Kan. 851, 853-54 , 685 P.2d 856 (1984). See State v. Dunn, 233 Kan. at 414-15; State v. Lamb, 209 Kan. 453, 467 , 497 P.2d 275 (1972), rev’d in part on other grounds 225 Kan. 38 , 587 P.2d 861 (1978). Probable cause has been described as “ ‘[b]its and pieces of information . . . fitted together until a picture is formed which leads a reasonably prudent person to believe a crime has been . . . committed and that evidence of the crime may be found on a particular person or in a place or means of conveyance.’ ” State v. Marks, 231 Kan. 645, 647 , 647 P.2d 1292 (1982) (quoting State v. Morgan, 222 Kan. 149, 151 , 563 P.2d 1056 [1977]). See State v. Williams, 229 Kan. 290, 291 , 623 P.2d 1334 , reh. denied 229 Kan. 646 , 630 P.2d 694 (1981).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Key v. Hein, Ebert & Weir, Chtd. · State v. Ratzlaff

2. ““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. State v. Mayberry, 248 Kan. 369, 383 , 807 P.2d 86 (1991); State v. Prouse, 244 Kan. 292, 294 , 767 P.2d 1308 (1989); State v. Lucas, 243 Kan. 462, 476-77 , 759 P.2d 90 (1988). Photographs which are unduly repetitious, gruesome, and without probative value should not be admitted into evidence. State v. Boyd, 216 Kan. 373, 377 , 532 P.2d 1064 (1975). Nevertheless, demonstrative photographs are not inadmissible merely because they are gruesome and shocking where they are true reproductions of relevant physical facts and material conditions at issue. State v. Mayberry, 248 Kan. at 383 .” 253 Kan. at 111 .”

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

3. ““Except as otherwise provided, no offender for whom a violation of conditions of release or assignment or a nonprison sanction has been established as provided in this section shall be required to serve any time for the sentence imposed or which might originally have been imposed in a state facility in the custody of the secretary of corrections for such violation, unless such person has already at least one prior assignment to a community correctional services program related to the crime for which the original sentence was imposed, except these provisions shall not apply to offenders who violate a condition of release or assignment or a non-prison sanction by committing a new misdemeanor or felony offense.””

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