State v. Gadelkarim’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

69 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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Claims that there has been an impermissible comment or question about a defendant’s post-Miranda silence are measured by the harmless error standard. Only error which fails to meet the federal standard of harmless error, defined as belief beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict, requires reversal. To facilitate the determination of whether a prosecutor’s comments are harmless error, Kansas appellate courts consider the nature and extent of the comment in comparison with the strength of the evidence of the defendant’s guilt, and .further consider whether the language used was manifestly intended to be, or was of such character that the jury would naturally and necessarily take it to be, a comment on the failure of the defendant to testify. [Citation omitted.]””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 28 Kan. App. 2d 418 - State v. Scott · 28 Kan. App. 2d 815 - State v. Fulton

2. ““Allegations of judicial misconduct during trial must be decided on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding such alleged misconduct. In order to warrant or require the granting of a new- trial, it must affirmatively appear that the conduct was of such a nature that it prejudiced the substantial rights of the complaining party. A mere possibility of prejudice from a remark of the judge is not sufficient to overturn a verdict or judgment. If a proper and reasonable construction will render the remark unobjectionable, the remark is not prejudicial.” State v. Gadelkarim, 256 Kan. 671 , Syl. ¶ 1, 887 P.2d 88 (1994).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hawkinson v. Bennett · State v. Sherrer

3. ““Evidence of an independent [criminal] offense is admissible in a criminal action if it is relevant as to the res gestae of the crime. As discussed previously, res gestae evidence is that evidence which does not constitute a portion of the crimes charged but has a natural, necessary, or logical connection to die crime.” 256 Kan. at 690.”

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