State v. Hart’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Cumulative error, considered collectively, may be so great as to require reversal of a defendant’s conviction. The test is whether the totality of the circumstances substantially prejudiced the defendant and denied him or her a fair trial. No prejudicial error may be found under the cumulative error doctrine if the evidence against the defendant is overwhelming. State v. Dixon, 289 Kan. 46, 71 , 209 P.3d 675 (2009).” State v. Hart, 297 Kan. 494, 513-14 , 301 P.3d 1279 (2013).”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Todd · State v. Smith-Parker

2. “An overbroad instruction is erroneous because the charging instrument sets out the specific offense alleged to inform the defendant of the nature of the accusation, to permit the development of a defense to meet that accusation, and to protect against conviction based on facts not contemplated in the accusation.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Charles · State v. Roberts

3. “[t]here was no evidence presented by either side that would suggest Hart's conduct was responsive to the victims' desires. Hart was not lured into presenting a defense that sealed a conviction on an alternate State theory that the girls had initiated or provoked the sexual contact. Rather, he generally denied that any sexual contact took place, and his testimony merely suggested motives for the victims or his ex-wife to fabricate the allegations against him. This was not, as in Wade's case, 'trial by ambush,' Wade, 284 Kan. at 541 , and the error in the instruction does not qualify as clearly erroneous or require reversal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Charles