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 1998–2010 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. Evansgreen2 sentences2004See State v. Evans, 270 Kan. 585, 588 , 17 P.3d 340 (2001); K.S.A. 2003 Supp. 22-3414(3). 2004See State v. Evans, 270 Kan. 585, 588 , 17 P.3d 340 (2001); K.S.A. 2003 Supp. 22-3414(3). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Gideon
green
2 sentences2000In Gideon , we held that where the defendant is not notified of one of the factors which the court proposes as a basis for departure, the defendant must make some proffer of the evidence he or she would present or the ar *262 gument he or she would make to refute the factor before this court will find reversible error. 257 Kan. at 620-21 . 1998In State v. Gideon, 257 Kan. 591, 621 , 894 P.2d 850 (1995), the Supreme Court held that in order for a defendant to successfully assert error based on the trial court’s failure to give notice of *763 the factors it intended to rely on for departure, “[t]he defendant must make some proffer of the evidence he would present (or the argument he would make) to refute the factor before this court will find reversible error.” Defendant made no such proffer. | 2 | 1998–2000 |
In Re the Marriage of Hair
green
1 sentence2010Nevertheless, because the trial court is required to comply with statutes authorizing payment of support and main *707 tenance, where it fails to do so, this court will find reversible error. 40 Kan. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Drennan
green
2 sentences2006When a defendant does not object to the giving of an instruction, this court will find reversible error only if the giving of the instruction was clearly erroneous. “ ‘Instructions are clearly erroneous only if the reviewing court is firmly convinced that there is a real possibility the jury would have rendered a different verdict if the trial error had not occurred.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Drennan, 278 Kan. 704, 712 , 101 P.3d 1218 (2004). 2006When a defendant does not object to the giving of an instruction, this court will find reversible error only if the giving of the instruction was clearly erroneous. “ ‘Instructions are clearly erroneous only if the reviewing court is firmly convinced that there is a real possibility the jury would have rendered a different verdict if the trial error had not occurred.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Drennan, 278 Kan. 704, 712 , 101 P.3d 1218 (2004). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.