Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 281 KAN 47 - State v. Edgar

State v. Edgar’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
2
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably State v. Davis (2007), State v. Ellmaker (2009)

52 state decisions

400200620102020decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist · State v. Tosh · State v. Gleason · State v. Mays

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

  1. “When murder is committed during the commission of a felony, the rule requiring instructions on lesser included offenses does not apply. The felonious conduct is held tantamount to the elements of deliberation and premeditation which are otherwise required for first-degree murder. It is only when the evidence of the underlying felony is weak, inconclusive, or conflicting that instructions on lesser included offenses may be required. [Citations omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “`[a] defendant's commission of the underlying felony supplies elements which must be absent from the lesser degrees of homicide, and a jury should be instructed only on lesser offenses of which the defendant reasonably may be convicted.' State v. Altum, 262 Kan. 733, 738 , 941 P.2d 1348 (1997).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “If the instructions properly and fairly state law as applied to the facts of the case, and a jury could not reasonably have been misled by them, the instructions do not constitute reversible error even if they are in some way erroneous.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.