Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 Kan. App. 2d 391 - State v. Patton

33 Kan. App. 2d 391 - State v. Patton’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2013
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Davis · State v. Mays · State v. Smith · State v. Wakefield · State v. Mincey

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

  1. “`[t]he trial court need not define every word or phrase in the instructions. It is only when the instructions as a whole would mislead the jury or cause it to speculate, that additional terms should be defined'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he commonly understood definition of 'premeditation' ... requires a party to form the design or intent to kill in advance”); Godwin v. State, 38 Md.App. 716 , 382 A.2d 596, 607 (1977) (”
    1 later decision 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.