State v. Hines’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““At the hearing on April 16, 1999, no mention was made of the statutory time left to tiy the defendant. While defense counsel requested a continuance, the defendant clearly did not waive his rights under K.S.A. 22-3402(1). Neither die State, whose obligation it is to insure that an accused is provided a speedy trial (see State v. Green, 254 Kan. at 672), nor the court mentioned the 90-day requirement in K.S.A. 22-3402(1). While it may have been impossible to set the defendant’s case within the time remaining . . . the record provides no evidence to support such a conclusion. Had the trial court been aware of or alerted to the defendant’s rights under K.S.A. 22-3402(1), the court may have been able to rely on the provisions of K.S.A. 22-3402(3)(d) to set the defendant’s trial on May 10, 1999, without violating the defendant’s right to a speedy trial under K.S.A. 22-3402(1). “The State argues that the court did not abuse its discretion in granting the last continuance. We agree, and further agree that given the choices, the trial court’s grant of a continuance was an exercise of sound judicial discretion. Nevertheless, neither the State, which agreed with the continuance, nor the court, which granted the continuance and set the case for hearing beyond the time required by K.S.A. 22-3402(1), acknowledged any problem. We may not assume, based upon a silent record, that it was impossible to comply with the provisions of K.S.A. 22-3402(1) or that dre court’s setting was based on K.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 30 Kan. App. 2d 120 - State v. Arrocha

2. “[o]n the first trial date of January 25, 1999, the State was granted a continuance under K.S.A. 22-3402(3)(c) to obtain material evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 34 Kan. App. 2d 746 - State v. Brown

3. “the defendant requested no continuances, and none of the delays in bringing him to trial was by reason of his application or fault.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 34 Kan. App. 2d 746 - State v. Brown