Vontress v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

49 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the movant provides persuasive reasons or circumstances that prevented him or her from filing the 60-1507 motion within the 1-year time limitation; (2) the merits of the movant's claim raise substantial issues of law or fact deserving of the district court's consideration; and (3) the movant sets forth a colorable claim of actual innocence, i.e., factual, not legal, innocence.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Noyce v. State · White v. State

2. “may be extended by the court only to prevent a manifest injustice.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. White v. State · Sherwood v. State

3. ““[T]he fundamental rule to which all other rules are subordinate is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. When language is plain and unambiguous, there is no need to resort to statutory construction. An appellate court merely interprets the language as it appears; it is not free to speculate and cannot read into the statute language not readily found there.” Zimmerman v. Board of Wabaunsee County Comm’rs, 289 Kan. 926 , Syl. ¶ 3, 218 P.3d 400 (2009).' State v. Hopkins, 295 Kan. 579, 581 , 285 P.3d 1021 (2012).” State v. Holt, 298 Kan. 469, 474 , 313 P.3d 826 , (2013).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re the Estate of Strader