Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 299 KAN 176 - State v. Hilt

State v. Hilt’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
1
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

89 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably State v. Butler (2018), State v. Holt (2014)

89 state decisions

58020142020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924

Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Neder v. United States · Frye v. United States · Alleyne v. United States · Ford v. Wainwright

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

  1. “' "Generally, a defendant is entitled to instructions on the law applicable to his or her defense theory if there is sufficient evidence for a rational factfinder to find for the defendant on that theory. [Citation omitted.] And if that defendant requests an instruction at trial, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant. [Citations omitted.]”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “' " '(1) First, the appellate court should consider the reviewability of the issue from both jurisdiction and preservation viewpoints, exercising an unlimited standard of review; (2) next, the court should use an unlimited review to determine whether the instruction was legally appropriate; (3) then, the court should determine whether there was sufficient evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant or the requesting party, that would have supported the instruction; and (4) finally, if the district court erred, the appellate court must determine whether the error was harmless, utilizing the test and degree of certainty set forth in State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied [ 565 U.S. 1221 , 132 S.Ct. 1594 , 182 L.Ed.2d 205 ] (2012).' [Citation omitted.] " ' "Generally, a defendant is entitled to instructions on the law applicable to his or her defense theory if there is sufficient evidence for a rational factfinder to find for the defendant on that theory. [Citation omitted.] And if that defendant requests an instruction at trial, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant. [Citations omitted.]' " ' "We examine 'jury instructions as a whole, without focusing on any single instruction, in order to determine whether they properly and fairly state the applicable law or whether it is reasonable to conclude that they could have misled the jury.' [Citation omitted.]”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'The hallmark of heat of passion is taking action upon impulse without reflection.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.