State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
56 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably State v. Aikins (1997), State v. Ninci (1997)
56 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 Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. Russell · State v. Timley · State v. Van Cleave · State v. Mayberry · State v. Dunn
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The principal problem facing an appellate court when a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is raised for the first time on appeal is that the trial court, which observed counsel’s performance and was aware of the trial strategy involved, is in a much better position to consider counsel’s competence than an appellate court is in reviewing the issue for the first time from a cold record. Many times what would appear in the record as an indication of ineffective counsel was fully justified under the circumstances present in the trial court. The trial judge should be the first to make a determination of such an issue and our refusal to consider tire matter for the first time on appeal is sound.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Mann““Unless evidence is presented that shows intoxication to the extent that a defendant’s ability to form the requisite intent was impaired, an instruction on the defense of voluntary intoxication is not required. State v. Gadelkarim, 247 Kan. [505,] 508, [ 802 P.2d 507 (1990)]; see State v. Smith, 254 Kan. 144 , Syl. ¶ 2, 864 P.2d 709 (1993); State v. Shehan, 242 Kan. 127 , Syl. ¶ 5, 744 P.2d 824 (1987). The defendant has the burden of showing that he or she was so intoxicated that his or her mental faculties were impaired by the consumption of alcohol or drugs. State v. Keeler, 238 Kan. 356, 360 , 710 P.2d 1279 (1985).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Brown““[W]hen a defendant opens an otherwise inadmissible area of evidence during the examination of witnesses, the prosecution may then present evidence in that formerly forbidden sphere. [Citations omitted.] By opening the door to otherwise inadmissible hearsay, a defendant waives the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.” State v. Johnson, 258 Kan. 475, 481 , 905 P.2d 94 (1995).”
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.