State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

118 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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The arguments and authorities relied on, separated by issue if there is more than one. Each issue must begin with citation to the appropriate standard of appellate review and a pinpoint reference to the location in the record on appeal where the issue was raised and ruled on. If the issue was not raised below, there must be an explanation why the issue is properly before the court. " (Emphasis added.)”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Godfrey · 55 Kan. App. 2d 630 - State v. Messner

2. “"The United States Supreme Court identifies three subcategories of categorical proportionality challenges. The first considers the nature of the offense, such as a prohibition on capital punishment for nonhomicide crimes against individuals. Graham , 560 U.S. at 60-61 [ 130 S.Ct. 2011 ] (citing Enmund v. Florida , 458 U.S. 782 , 102 S.Ct. 3368 , 73 L.Ed. 2d 1140 [1982] ). The second considers the characteristics of the offender, such as a categorical rule prohibiting the death penalty for juveniles. Graham , 560 U.S. at 61 [ 130 S.Ct. 2011 ] (citing Roper v. Simmons , 543 U.S. 551 , 125 S.Ct. 1183 , 161 L.Ed. 2d 1 [2005] ). The third, which was first recognized in Graham , combines the two because it 'implicates a particular type of sentence as it applies to an entire class of offenders who have committed a range of crimes.' 560 U.S. at 61 [ 130 S.Ct. 2011 ]." State v. Williams , 298 Kan. 1075 , 1086, 319 P.3d 528 (2014).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Kahler · – State v. Patterson –

3. “"The Court first considers 'objective indicia of society's standards, as expressed in legislative enactments and state practice' to determine whether there is a national consensus against the sentencing practice at issue. Roper , [543 U.S.] at 563 [ 125 S.Ct. 1183 ]. Next, guided by 'the standards elaborated by controlling precedents and by the Court's own understanding and interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's text, history, meaning, and purpose,' Kennedy, 554 U.S. at 421 [ 128 S.Ct. 2641 ], the Court must determine in the exercise of its own independent judgment whether the punishment in question violates the Constitution. Roper , [543 U.S.] at 564 [ 125 S.Ct. 1183 ]." Graham v. Florida , 560 U.S. 48 , 61, 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed. 2d 825 (2010).”

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