State v. Gracey (2009)
green
· 237 citation events
across 3 courts.
Showing the 15 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200920172026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
State v. Portillo (2012)
See Inkelaar, 293 Kan. at 433-34 ; Huerta-Alvarez, 291 Kan. at 254-55 (all three complaints contained defendant’s year of birth in the caption and alleged that at least one of the counts was an off-grid offense); Reyna, 290 Kan. at 678 (defendant’s year of birth in caption and stated charges were for off-grid felonies); Gonzales, 289 Kan. at 369 (listed date of birth and listed crime as off-grid); Gracey, 288 Kan. at 254-55 (same).
same
green
State v. PEIRANO (2009)
“An illegal sentence, as contemplated by K.S.A. 22-3504(1), is a sentence imposed by a court without jurisdiction; a sentence that does not conform to the statutory provision, either in the character or the term of the punishment authorized; or a sentence that is ambiguous with respect to the time and manner in which it is to be served. [Citation omitted.]” State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. at 261.
green
State v. Spencer (2011)
See Gracey, 288 Kan. at 261 , 200 P.3d 1275 .
green
State v. Ballard (2009)
green
State v. Allen (2021)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009); Green v. General Motors Corp., 56 Kan.
green
State v. Dunn (2019)
See State v. Spencer , 291 Kan. 796 , 820, 248 P.3d 256 (2011) (citing State v. Gracey , 288 Kan. 252 , 260-61, 200 P.3d 1275 [2009] ); see also K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 22-3504(a) (authorizing courts to correct an illegal sentence "at any time" while the defendant is serving such sentence).
green
State v. Williams (2014)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009).
green
State v. O'Connor (2014)
The interpretation of statutes is a question of law, and, thus, the scope of review is unlimited.’ State v. Taylor, 262 Kan. 471 , Syl. ¶ 4, 939 P.2d 904 (1997).” State v. Vandervort, 276 Kan. 164, 173 , 72 P.3d 925 (2003); see also State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009) (Whether a district court has correctly interpreted and applied the provisions of the KSGA is a question of law subject to de novo review.).
Whether a district court has correctly interpreted and applied the provisions of the KSGA is a question of law subject to de novo review.
green
State v. Hankins (2014)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009); State v. Van Hoet, 277 Kan. 815, 826-27 , 89 P.3d 606 (2004).
green
State v. Jackson (2013)
See, e.g., Jolly, 291 Kan. at 846 (citing State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 259 , 200 P.3d 1275 [2009]).
green
State v. Burnett (2012)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009) (interpretation of a sentencing statute is a question of law subject to unlimited review); NEA-Coffeyville v. USD No. 445, 268 Kan. 384, 386 , 996 P.2d 821 (2000) (interpretation of caselaw is subject to unlimited review).
interpretation of a sentencing statute is a question of law subject to unlimited review
green
State v. Sitlington (2010)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252 , Syl. ¶ 1, 200 P.3d 1275 (2009); State v. McElroy, 281 Kan. 256 , Syl. ¶ 2, 130 P.3d 100 (2006).
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009).
green
Greathouse v. KASB RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES (2010)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009).
green
State v. McMullen (2009)
See State v. Gracey, 288 Kan. 252, 257 , 200 P.3d 1275 (2009).