State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Generally, ‘[an appellate court] will not disturb a sentence imposed by a trial court on the ground it is excessive, provided it is within the statutory limits and within the realm of the trial court’s discretion and not the result of partiality, prejudice, oppression, or corrupt motive.’ [Citation omitted.] Disparity in the sentences of the codefendants does not amount to abuse of discretion ‘where the trial court considers the individual characteristics of the defendant being sentenced, the harm caused by that defendant, and the prior criminal conduct of that defendant.’ [Citation omitted.]” Smith, 254 Kan. at 155 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hegwood · 19 Kan. App. 2d 625 - State v. Kelly

2. ““In sentencing a convicted felon, a second trial judge is not restricted to imposing a sentence no greater than the sentence another judge previously imposed upon a codefendant for the same crime. The second judge, however, must consider the sentence given to the codefendant and, if a longer sentence is given, the reason for doing so should be set forth on the record.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Davis

3. ““Multiplicity exists if the State uses a single wrongful act as the basis for multiple charges. Charges are not multiplieitous if each charge requires proof of a fact not required in proving the other. Charges are also not multiplieitous if the offenses occur at different times and in different places.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Baker