State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
120 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably State v. Ellmaker (2009), State v. Whitesell (2000)
120 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 Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor · Frey v. United States · State v. Timley · Wright v. Kansas Water Office · State v. Aikins
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘The sufficiency of the charging document is measured by whether it contains the elements of the offense intended to be charged, sufficiently apprises the defendant of what he or she must be prepared to meet, and is specific enough to make a subsequent plea of double jeopardy possible. The charging document is sufficient if it substantially follows the language of the statute or charges the offense in equivalent words or words of the same import. [Citations omitted.]’ ” 27 Kan. App. 2d at 567 (quoting State v. Smith, 268 Kan. 222, 226-27 , 993 P.2d 1213 [1999]).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination extends until there is a final judgment in a case and a right to appeal has expired.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“a danger could exist that the jury was not unanimous as to the act or acts it relied upon for the conviction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Butler · State v. Cottrell
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.