State v. Brady’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably State v. Holmes (2004), State v. Conley (2000)
44 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 State v. Donlay · Memorial Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. Knutson · State v. Gideon · State v. Bailey · State v. Mertz
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"When the sufficiency of the evidence is challenged for establishing the existence of an aggravating circumstance in a hard 40 sentencing proceeding, the standard of review is whether, after a review of all the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational factfinder could have found the existence of the aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Brady, 261 Kan. 109 , Syl. ¶ 4, 929 P.2d 132 (1996).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Brady did not receive multiple punishments for tire killing of Flynn and Wilcox. Instead, Brady received a life sentence for the murder of Wilcox, which was enhanced to a hard 40 sentence because the murder occurred in tire midst of a killing spree, making the murder deserving of extra punishment. Brady also received one punishment for the murder of Flynn, a life sentence which was enhanced to a hard 40 sentence because the murder occurred in the midst of a killing spree, making the murder deserving of extra punishment. The fact that two enhancements were imposed for the same killing spree is irrelevant. Each murder was worse and deserving of more punishment because it took place in die midst of a killing spree.” 261 Kan. at 120 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Jamison““If die court finds that one or more of the aggravating circumstances enumerated in K.S.A 21-4636 and amendments diereto exist and, further, diat die existence of such aggravating circumstances is not outweighed by any mitigating circumstances which are found to exist, the defendant shall be sentenced pursuant to K.S.A. 21-4638 [the hard 40 sentence] and amendments thereto; otherwise, the defendant shall be sentenced as provided by law.” K.S.A. 21-4635(c).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Jamison
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.