Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 276 Kan. 504 - State v. Weaver

State v. Weaver’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
February 2025
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 2025

20 state decisions

100200320102020decided

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 Barker v. Wingo · State v. Smallwood · United States v. Butler · State v. Hill · State v. Goss

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. ““Weaver’s crime was one count of possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The State’s case against him was simple and straightforward — police found on Weaver crack cocaine packaged in individual units and $265 cash, including 12 $20 bills. The State’s evidence against him was presented in 64 transcript pages of testimony. The tolerable delay for an ordinary crime is less than for a complex one. [Barker,] 407 U.S. at 531 . Further, Weaver was not arraigned until 123 days after his arrest, and another 176 days passed before Weaver’s counsel asked for and was granted a continuance of the trial date. Two hundred and ninety-nine days passed in which no attempt was made to try the defendant.” 276 Kan. at 510-11 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “inquiry is necessarily dependent upon the peculiar circumstances of the case. To take but one example, the delay that can be tolerated for an ordinary street crime is considerably less than for a serious, complex conspiracy charge.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “whether the length of delay is presumptively prejudicial depends on the peculiar circumstances of each case, and the mere passage of time is not determinative.”
    1 later decision 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.