Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 278 Kan. 520 - State v. Marsh

State v. Marsh’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

120
cited by 120 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
February 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 108 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 120 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Roper Superintendent Potosi Correctional Center v. Simmons (2005), Kansas v. Marsh (2006)

2 federal appellate · 108 state decisions

710200420102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 4001

Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Chapman v. State of California · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Davis v. Alaska · Gregg v. Georgia

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

  1. “we should be highly skeptical of reversing an earlier decision where nothing has changed except the composition of the court.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “If, by unanimous vote, the jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt that one or more of the aggravating circumstances enumerated in K.S.A. 21-4625 . . . exist and, further, that the existence of such aggravating circumstances is not outweighed by any mitigating circumstances which are found to exist, the defendant shall be sentenced to death; otherwise, the defendant shall be sentenced as provided by law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'The application of stare decisis ensures stability and continuity—demonstrating a continuing legitimacy of judicial review. Judicial adherence to constitutional precedent ensures that all branches of government, including the judicial branch, are bound by law.'”
    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.