Dills v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Here Dills was specifically charged with setting up and operating a poker game for compensation, etc. The latter part of § 1960, K.S., seems to make it plain that those engaged in the game, unless they are instrumental in management, operation or control, are not punishable under this section of the statute. “It is true, as contended by the com-monwéalth, that the actions of the appellant and the others present, and the presence of the cards, chips, and tables, present circumstances indicating that some kind of a game had been in progress. ’ But do these circumstances, strong as they are, serve to show that Dills had been1 or'was then operating or managing a game of chance for percentage or commission? Reluctantly we say we think not. In a prosecution for gaming the general rules of evidence governing criminal prosecutions prevail; the burden is laid on the state to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bowling v. Commonwealth