crucial inquiry (Kentucky) · Go Syfert
← Kentucky issues

crucial inquiry in Kentucky

5 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2024 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Kentucky 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
H.R. Ex Rel. Taylor v. Revlettgreen
kyctapp · 1999 · cited in 2 Kentucky opinions naming this issue, 2021–2024
2 sentences

2024Taylor v. Revlett, 998 S.W.2d 778, 780 (Ky. App. 1999).

2021Taylor v. Revlett, 998 S.W.2d 778, 780 (Ky. App. 1999). -37- Additionally, the doctrine is subject to very limited exceptions.

22
Lawson v. Commonwealthgreen
ky · 2001 · cited in 1 Kentucky opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Lawson v. Commonwealth, 53 S.W.3d 534, 540 (Ky.2001).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania green
scotus · 2003
1 sentence

2005Finally, most recently in Sattazahn , the Court noted that the crucial inquiry in determining whether a defendant is subject to the death penalty on retrial when the first jury did not impose death, is whether the jury made findings of fact in the first trial that “constituted an ‘acquittal’ of the aggravating circumstances.” 537 U.S. at 109 , 123 S.Ct. at 738.

12005–2005
Frederick v. Collins green
kyctapphigh · 1964
1 sentence

2005In Frederick v. Collins, 378 S.W.2d 617 (Ky.1964), an employee of a neighborhood grocery shot and killed a frequent patron of the store who disguised his voice and said “Stick’em up; this is a hold up.” The employee turned around, hit the patron in the face with a gun, and shot him without realizing who it was.

12005–2005

Where else courts name it

CA 247 (1906–2026) PA 115 (1920–2026) IL 110 (1895–2026) OH 110 (1899–2025) TX 85 (1964–2025) LA 85 (1968–2026) MI 65 (1908–2025) NY 65 (1889–2025) NC 54 (1904–2026) HI 43 (1955–2025) AL 42 (1921–2015) TN 39 (1910–2020) MA 37 (1975–2025) DC 34 (1982–2026) GA 34 (1907–2023) WA 32 (1970–2021) FL 30 (1974–2026) NJ 28 (1960–2025) IN 27 (1938–2023) MD 22 (1951–2019) AZ 14 (1966–2021) MO 13 (1890–2002) IA 13 (1922–2023) OR 12 (1931–2020) CO 12 (1983–2025) VA 10 (1918–2022) AK 10 (1972–2005) MN 10 (1973–2026) NE 9 (1941–2000) MT 9 (1899–2019) AR 8 (1939–2026) WI 8 (1963–2021) NM 7 (1985–2021) KS 7 (1926–2016) SC 7 (1941–2010) MS 6 (1991–2024) VT 6 (1991–2022) CT 6 (1997–2014) UT 5 (1939–2017) KY 5 (2005–2024) SD 5 (1956–2019) WY 4 (1981–2012) NV 4 (1975–2025) ID 4 (1928–2007) ME 4 (1901–2024) OK 4 (1964–2003) NH 3 (2000–2019) RI 2 (1991–2009) DE 2 (2016–2020) ND 2 (1901–1939)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check