9 Kan. App. 2d 106 - State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2020
9 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on In re Fowles
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““K.S.A. 21-3104(3) says defendant’s omission to perform a duty imposed by the law of this state,’ i.e., to return to custody, resulted in a crime ‘within the state.’ As the Judicial Council note reflects, the statute codifies the common lawprinciple that a person may commit a crime within this state while remaining outside of it, and such crime may be an act of omission as well as an act of commission. See In re Fowles, 89 Kan. 430 , 131 Pac. 598 (1913).” 9 Kan. App. 2d at 106-07 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. James
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.