Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 Kan. App. 2d 67 - State v. Dill

3 Kan. App. 2d 67 - State v. Dill’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
July 1987
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Griffin v. California · Comfort v. California · Associated Food Retailers of Greater Chicago, Inc. v. Jewel Tea Co. · Brady v. Ohio

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

  1. ““(1) Is the misconduct so gross and flagrant as to deny the accused a fair trial (i.e are the objectionable statements likely to affect the jurors to the defendant’s prejudice)? (2) Do the remarks show ill will on the prosecutor’s part? (3) Is the evidence against the defendant of such a direct and overwhelming nature that it can be said that the prejudicial remarks of the prosecutor were likely to have little weight in the minds of the jurors?””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.