Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Mooregreen2 sentences2010See Moore, 287 Kan. at 133 , 194 P.3d 18 . 2010See Moore, 287 Kan. at 133 . | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Roeder
green
1 sentence2019In its opinion, our Supreme Court held that it is a " fundamental notion that everyone is presumed to know the law and one cannot use as a defense his or her subjective belief that the law is or should be something different." (Emphasis added.) Roeder , 300 Kan. at 922 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
cluster 791857
green
2 sentences2014White also discussed Menendez v. Terhune, 422 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir. 2005), where tire Menendez brothers, Erik and Lyle, were convicted in California state court of two counts each of first-de *925 gree murder for shooting their defenseless parents with numerous shotgun blasts. 2014The state trial and appellate courts found that an imperfect self-defense instruction was not warranted because the brothers were unable to show a belief that danger was imminent. 422 F.3d at 1028-29 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Enraca
green
1 sentence2014As noted above, the Enraca court extrapolated from Christian S. the general rule that an imperfect self-defense claim is only available where the unreasonable beliefs would have supported a perfect self-defense claim if they had been reasonable beliefs. 53 Cal. 4th at 761 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Kirkpatrick
red
2 sentences2012The application of imperfect self-defense in Kansas was explained in State v. Kirkpatrick, 286 Kan. 329, 339 , 184 P.3d 247 (2008), where this court stated: “Perfect self-defense is a concept based on justification or excuse and operates as a complete defense. 2012The application of imperfect self-defense in Kansas was explained in State v. Kirkpatrick, 286 Kan. 329, 339 , 184 P.3d 247 (2008), where this court stated: “Perfect self-defense is a concept based on justification or excuse and operates as a complete defense. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.