Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 280 KAN 541 - State v. Jackson

State v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably State v. Phillips (2012), State v. Berry (2011)

34 state decisions

200200520102020decided

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 State v. Beach · State v. LaMae · State v. Boone · State v. Peterson · State v. Hearron

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

  1. ““ “When the trial court refuses to give a requested instruction, an appellate court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the party requesting the instruction. . . . [A]n appellate court cannot consider the requested instruction in isolation. Rather, the court must consider all of the instructions together as a whole. If the instructions as a whole properly and fairly state the law as applied to the facts of the case, and the jury could not reasonably be misled by them, the instructions are not reversible error even if they are in some way erroneous. [Citation omitted.]’ State v. Jackson, 280 Kan. 541, 549-50 , 124 P.3d 460 (2005).””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““INSTRUCTION NO. 4 “Reginald Johnson is charged with the crime of murder in the first degree. Mr. Johnson pleads not guilty. “To establish this charge, each of the following claims must be proved: 1. That Reginald Johnson intentionally killed Amy Whiteman; 2. That such killing was done with premeditation; and 3. That this act occurred on or about August 20, 2007, in Sedgwick County, Kansas.” “INSTRUCTION NO. 6 “If you do not agree that Reginald Johnson is guilty of murder in the first degree, you should then consider the lesser included offense of murder in the second degree. “To establish this charge, each of the following claims must be proved: 1. That Reginald Johnson intentionally killed Amy Whiteman; and 2. That this act occurred on or about August 20, 2007, in Sedgwick County, Kansas.” “INSTRUCTION NO. 7 “In determining whether Reginald Johnson is guilty of murder in the second degree, you should also consider the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional killing done in the heat of passion. “If you decide Reginald Johnson intentionally killed Amy Whiteman, but that it was done in the heat of passion, the defendant may be convicted of voluntary manslaughter only. “To establish this charge, each of the following claims must be proved: 1. That Reginald Johnson intentionally killed Amy Whiteman; 2. That it was done in the heat of passion; and 3. That this act occurred on or about August 20, 2007, in Sedgwick County, Kansas.” (Emphas”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a defendant will be held liable for a death that occurs during the commission of a felony unless there is an extraordinary intervening event that supercedes [ sic ] the defendant's act and becomes the sole legal cause of death.”
    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.