State v. Reed’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably State v. McDaniel (1994), State v. Shears (1996)
28 state decisions
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 Boykin v. Alabama · North Carolina v. Alford · McCarthy v. United States · Dusky v. United States · Hudson v. United States
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““On March 17, 1986, Jimmy Ray Vanderlinden was found dead in his residence near Galena, Kansas. The victim had been bound hand and foot and had been shot three times in the back of the head. As a result of the ensuing investigation, multiple felony charges were filed against Susan Diane Vanderlinden (the victim’s wife), Luke Patrick Callihan, and the defendant herein. It was the State’s theory that the wife had hired Callihan to kill her husband. Callihan, in turn, had subcontracted the job to the defendant. Callihan, pursuant to a plea bargain, pled guilty to conspiracy to commit murder (a class C felony) in exchange for the dismissal of the other charges and his testimony against Mrs. Vanderlinden and the defendant herein.” State v. Reed, 248 Kan. 506, 506-07 , 809 P.2d 553 (1991) {Reed I).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Reed“‘This procedure basically follows Rule IX of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, compliance with which is held to be mandatory upon the federal courts in McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 , 22 L. Ed. 2d 418 , 89 S. Ct. 1166 (1969), and which procedure is fastened upon the state courts as a requirement of due process. Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 , 23 L. Ed. 2d 274 , 89 S. Ct. 1709 (1969); White v. State, 222 Kan. 709, 713 , 568 P.2d 112 (1977). K.S.A. 22-3210 was enacted following the Boykin decision. See Widener v. State, 210 Kan. 234, 237-38 , 499 P.3d 1123 (1972).’ ” State v. Reed, 248 Kan. 506, 508 , 809 P.2d 553 (1991) (quoting State v. Dillon, 242 Kan. 410, 413 , 748 P.2d 856 [1988]).”
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.