Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 255 Kan. 888 - State v. Bafford

State v. Bafford’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
3
states following
October 2014
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably State v. Smallwood (1998), Sola-Morales v. State (2014)

35 state decisions

180199420002010decided

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 Barker v. Wingo · State v. Henson · State v. Sutherland · State v. Cheun-Phon Ji · State v. Green

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

  1. ““[T]he tíme between filing and the decision on a competency hearing motion is chargeable to the defendant when die decision is made within a reasonable time period. The filing of a notice of intent to rely on the insanity defense also operates as a waiver of the requirements of K.S.A. 22-3402 if trial delay was reasonably occasioned by the assertion of the insanity defense. [Citation omitted.] The time between the filing of a motion for a psychiatric examination and the date on which the psychiatrist’s report is received is chargeable against the defendant. [Citation omitted.]” State v. Bafford, 255 Kan. 888, 892 , 879 P.2d 613 (1994).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““If any person charged with a crime and held to answer on an appearance bond shall not be brought to trial within one hundred eighty (180) days after arraignment on the charge, such person shall be entided to be discharged from further liability to be tried for the crime charged, unless the delay shall happen as a result of the application or fault of the defendant . . . .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““(4) Before imposing sentence the court shall: . ... (c) address the defendant personally and ask the defendant if the defendant wishes to make a statement on the defendant’s own behalf and to present any evidence in mitigation of punishment. . . .” (Emphasis added.)”
    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.