State v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

90 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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[p]rosecutors are not allowed to make statements that inflame the passions or prejudices of the jury or distract the jury from its duty to make decisions based on the evidence and the controlling law,”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Sturgis · State v. Anderson

2. ““A defendant is entitled to present his or her theory of defense. The exclusion of relevant, admissible, and noncumulative evidence, which is an integral part of the theory of defense, violates the defendant’s fundamental right to a fair trial. However, the defendant’s right to present a defense is limited by the statutory rules of evidence and the case law interpreting those rules. [Citation omitted.]” State v. Baker, 281 Kan. 997, 1008 , 135 P.3d 1098 (2006).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 39 Kan. App. 2d 180 - State v. Huntley · State v. Gaither

3. ““ ‘ “ ‘Cumulative trial errors, when considered collectively, may be so great as to require reversal of the defendant’s conviction. The test is whether the totality of circumstances substantially prejudiced the defendant and denied tire defendant a fair trial. No prejudicial error may be found upon this cumulative effect rule, however, if the evidence is overwhelming against the defendant.’ ” ’ ” State v. Baker, 281 Kan. 997, 1017 , 135 P.3d 1098 (2006).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Sanchez · 50 Kan. App. 2d 82 - State v. Ramey