State v. Cottrell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"1. JENNIFER M. CURTIS responded to Officer Padron's text inquiry with details on prices and where to go to conclude the sale of hydrocodone and oxycodone. "2. JENNIFER M. CURTIS contacted RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR., with the sales order she obtained from Officer Padrone [ sic ] and had, RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR., appear at the designated time and place with the pills Officer Padron ordered. "3. RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR., went to the transaction site which JENNIFER M. CURTIS had brokered between Officer Padron and RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR. "4. JENNIFER M. CURTIS waited by RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR.'s vehicle while he went to Officer Padron's vehicle and conducted the exchange brokered by JENNIFER M. CURTIS. "5. JENNIFER M. CURTIS met with RONALD D. COTTRELL, JR. at his vehicle after the brokered transaction with Officer Padron was completed."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cottrell

2. “"[A] single agreement to commit several crimes constitutes one conspiracy. By the same reasoning, multiple agreements to commit separate crimes constitute multiple conspiracies. Here, there was only one conspiracy alleged: the distribution of controlled substances. Because none of the overt acts charged in furtherance of that conspiracy are factually and legally sufficient to constitute a crime in and of themselves, there is no risk here that the jury could have found multiple conspiracies. ... "... Because the facts of this case support only one conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, a multiple acts instruction would not have been proper." Cottrell , 53 Kan. App. 2d at 431 -32 , 390 P.3d 44 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cottrell

3. “'In an alternative means case, where a single offense may be committed in more than one way, there must be jury unanimity as to guilt for the single crime charged. Unanimity is not required, however, as to the means by which the crime was committed so long as substantial evidence supports each alternative means. In reviewing an alternative means case, a court must determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found each means of committing the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cottrell