Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 KAN 353 - State v. Wimer

State v. Wimer’s Empirical Analysis

1916

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
December 1975
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1975

8 state decisions

201916192019301940195019601970decided

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 State v. McGaffin · State v. Rogers · State v. Johnson · State v. Witt · State v. White

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

  1. ““Malice aforethought has been held to be nothing more than an unlawful or wicked intention. (The State v. White, 14 Kan. 538 ; The State v. Fooks, 29 Kan. 425 .) Malice has been said to signify ill will, hatred or revenge toward a particular individual; as denoting that condition of one’s mind which is manifested by his intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause or excuse; any wicked or mischievous intention of the mind. (The State v. Witt, 34 Kan. 488 , 8 Pac. 769 .) Malice aforethought, a wicked intention to kill, previously and deliberately formed. (The State v. McGaffin, 36 Kan. 315 , 13 Pac. 560 .)””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.