State v. Wells’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'a statute operates only prospectively unless there is clear language indicating the legislature intended otherwise. State v. Martin, 270 Kan. 603, 608-09 , 17 P.3d 344 (2001); State v. Sisk, 266 Kan. 41, 44 , 966 P.2d 671 (1998). An exception to this rule has been employed when the statutory change is merely procedural or remedial in nature and does not prejudicially affect the substantive rights of the parties. Martin, 270 Kan. at 608 - 09; State v. Ford, 262 Kan. 206, 208 , 936 P.2d 255 (1997).' Wells, 297 Kan. [741,] 761 [, 305 P.3d 568 (2013)].”

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

2. ““There are two elements of relevance: materiality and probative value. [Citations omitted.] In analyzing whether evidence is material, the focus is on whether the fact sought to be proved has a legitimate and effective bearing on the decision of tire case'and is in dispute. [Citation omitted.] Evidence is probative if it has ‘ “any tendency in reason to prove” ’ a material fact. [Citation omitted.] The materiality of evidence is reviewed de novo, and the existence of probative value is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. [Citation omitted.]” State v. Wells, 297 Kan. 741, 759 , 305 P.3d 568 (2013).”

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

3. “). Pfannenstiel's motion, in which he requested the dismissal of his court-appointed attorney and the appointment of new counsel, alleged several grounds that potentially established a conflict of interest, an irreconcilable disagreement, or a complete breakdown in communication between himself and his attorney. Thus, his motion constituted”

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