55 Kan. App. 2d 464 - State v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2022
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Ward · United States v. Berrios · State v. Gant · State Ex Rel. Murray v. Palmgren · State v. Logsdon
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.
“By invidious, we generally mean that the State has discriminated based on some improper characteristic, such as race, religion, national origin, or sex. . . . As for arbitrariness, 'a prosecutor's enforcement classification is”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keys“has been intentionally and purposefully singled out for prosecution on the basis of arbitrary or invidious criteria.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keys“people have been classified according to criteria which are clearly irrelevant to law enforcement purposes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keys
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.