State v. Bloom’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

45 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In order for prosecutorial misconduct to constitute reversible error, the error must be of such magnitude as to deny a defendant his constitutional right to a fair trial. State v. Pabst, 268 Kan. 501, 504 , 996 P.2d 321 (2000). Three factors should be considered in determining whether to grant a new trial because of a prosecutor’s violation of an order in limine. First, was the prosecutor’s misconduct so gross and flagrant as to prejudice the jury against the defendant? Second, does the admission of the statement indicate ill will by the prosecutor? Third, is the evidence against the defendant so overwhelming that there was little or no likelihood the prosecutor’s violation of the order in limine changed the result of the trial? State v. Crime, 271 Kan. 87 , Syl. ¶ 11, 22 P.3d 1057 (2001).” State v. Bloom, 273 Kan. 291, 301 , 44 P.3d 305 (2002).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Gleason

2. “within ninety (90) days after such person's arraignment on the charge . . . unless the delay shall happen as a result of the application or fault of the defendant . . . .”

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