State v. Ordway’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably State v. McCaslin (2011), State v. Carter (2007)
46 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 United States v. Bagley · Lyles v. United States · State v. Ruff · State v. Gregory · 104 Ill. 2d 399 - People v. O'NEAL
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Legislative history of K.S.A. 21-3403 shows that the definition of voluntary manslaughter was expanded by the addition of subsection (b) in 1992. L. 1992, ch. 298, § 5. Until then, the statute defined voluntary manslaughter as an intentional killing upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion. Notes on proposed criminal code revisions were attached to the minutes of the Senate Judiciary Committee from March 22, 1992, which contained the following comments about subsection (b) of 21-3403: ‘(b) “Imperfect right to self-defense” manslaughter. ‘This new subsection covers intentional killings that result from an unreasonable but honest belief that deadly force was justified in self-defense. In essence, the defendant meets the subjective, but not the objective, test for self-defense. This so-called “imperfect right to self-defense” is recognized in various forms. Kansas apparently recognizes it for unintentional killings under involuntary manslaughter. [Citations omitted.] The Model Penal Code also follows this approach. Some states, e.g. Illinois, recognize this partial defense for intentional killings. See, LaFave, Criminal Law pp. 665-666. (1986). ‘Applying this partial defense to intentional killings is simply a recognition of the practical realities of plea bargaining and jury verdicts. Often it is unjust to prosecute and convict such killers of murder and it is equally unjust to acquit them. This new subsection provides a middle category that is theoretically sound and l”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] person who intentionally or knowingly kills an individual commits voluntary manslaughter if at the time of the killing he believes the circumstances to be such that, if they existed, would justify the killing ... but his belief is unreasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“where a defendant raises the defense of insanity, and more specifically, the `unreasonable but honest belief' necessary to support the `imperfect self-defense manslaughter' cannot be based upon a psychotic delusion.”
2 later decisions 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.