Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 38 Kan. App. 2d 683 - State v. Boggs

38 Kan. App. 2d 683 - State v. Boggs’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2008
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Booker · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Blakely v. Washington · Shepard v. United States · Griffith v. Kentucky

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

  1. ““[T]he State’s argument raises several questions. First, what ‘intent’ was tended to be proved? Boggs’ defense was that he neither possessed the marijuana nor the drug paraphernalia. Unlike Graham , Boggs did not assert that the charged crimes in question were done innocently. As a result, the issue of intent was not in dispute. Second, what ‘knowledge’ was tended to be proved? The question to be answered was as follows: Did Boggs possess the marijuana and drug paraphernalia? No claim was made that Boggs may have possessed the marijuana and drug paraphernalia without knowledge that he had it. Third, what ‘absence of mistake or accident’ was a question in this case? No one contended that Boggs possessed the marijuana and the drug paraphernalia without knowing what the items were or possessed the items by mistake.” 38 Kan. App. 2d at 692 .”
    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.