Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 Kan. App. 2d 714 - State v. Jones

41 Kan. App. 2d 714 - State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 2014
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners · State v. Storey · State v. Boyd · State v. Drayton

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

  1. ““A trial court may not ignore a jury’s request submitted pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3420(3) but must respond in some meaningful manner or seek additional clarification or limitation of the request. It is only when the trial court makes no attempt to provide a meaningful response to an appropriate request or gives an erroneous response that the mandatory requirement of K.S.A. 22-3420(3) is breached. Once the trial court attempts to give an enlightening response to a jury’s request or seeks additional clarification or limitation of the request, then any issue as to the sufficiency or propriety of the response is one of abuse of discretion by the trial court.” State v. Boyd, 257 Kan. 82 , Syl. ¶ 2, 891 P.2d 358 (1995).”
    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.