38 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2024 10 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. Millergreen2 sentences2022Friedman v. Kansas State Bd. of Healing Arts, 296 Kan. 636, 644 , 294 P.3d 287 (2013); see also State v. Miller, 308 Kan. 1119 , 1157, 427 P.3d 907 (2018) ("The burden is on the party making a claim of error to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails."). 2022State v. Simmons, 307 Kan. 38 , 43, 405 P.3d 1190 (2017); see also State v. Miller, 308 Kan. 1119 , 1157, 427 P.3d 907 (2018) ("The burden is on the party making a claim of error to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails."). | 9 | 10 |
In Re Bishopgreen2 sentences2014Annot. 377) provides that a respondent who files exceptions to the final hearing report, but does not file a brief, “will be deemed to have conceded that the findings of fact made by the hearing panel are supported by the evidence.” See also Bishop, 285 Kan. at 1106 (exception deemed abandoned or waived if respondent’s brief advances argument without proper citation to the record to support that exception). 2014Annot. 377) provides that a respondent who files exceptions to the final hearing report, but does not file a brief, "will be deemed to have conceded that the findings of fact made by the hearing panel are supported by the evidence." See also Bishop, 285 Kan. at 1106 (exception deemed abandoned or waived if respondent's brief advances argument without proper citation to the record to support that exception). | 2 | 2 |
National Bank of Andover v. Kansas Bankers Surety Co.green2 sentences2012See National Bank of Andover v. Kansas Bankers Surety Co., 290 Kan. 247, 283 , 225 P.3d 707 (2010) (The burden is on the party making a claim to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails.). 2012See National Bank of Andover v. Kansas Bankers Surety Co., 290 Kan. 247, 283 , 225 P.3d 707 (2010) (The burden is on the party making a claim to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails.). | 1 | 2 |
United States v. Armstronggreen2 sentences2022Gant, 288 Kan. at 85 ; see United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 463 , 116 S. Ct. 1480 , 134 L. 2022Gant, 288 Kan. at 85 ; see United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 463 , 116 S. Ct. 1480 , 134 L. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wilsongreen1 sentence2021See State v. Wilson, 308 Kan. 516 , 520, 421 P.3d 742 (2018) (reviewing record in context of motion to withdraw plea); State v. Alford, 308 Kan. 1336 , 1338, 429 P.3d 197 (2018) (reviewing record in context of motion to correct illegal sentence). | 1 | 1 |
Sola-Morales v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See State v. Miller, 308 Kan. 1119 , 1157, 427 P.3d 907 (2018) (burden is on party making claim of error to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, claim of error fails); Sola-Morales, 300 Kan. at 881 (movant must state evidentiary basis in support of claims or evidentiary basis must appear in record). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sissongreen2 sentences2018See State v. Sisson , 302 Kan. 123 , 128, 351 P.3d 1235 (2015). *938 Second, the email was ruled to be impermissible hearsay evidence, but Miller got information contained in the email admitted by alleging that it was not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein, but rather to establish what caused the email to be sent. 2018See State v. Sisson , 302 Kan. 123 , 128, 351 P.3d 1235 (2015). *938 Second, the email was ruled to be impermissible hearsay evidence, but Miller got information contained in the email admitted by alleging that it was not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein, but rather to establish what caused the email to be sent. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Paulgreen2 sentences2010See State v. Paul, 285 Kan. 658, 670 , 175 P.3d 840 (2008) (The burden is on the appellant to furnish a record to support a claim of error at thé trial *41 court. 2010See State v. Paul, 285 Kan. 658, 670 , 175 P.3d 840 (2008) (The burden is on the appellant to furnish a record to support a claim of error at thé trial *41 court. | 1 | 1 |
Hawkins v. Dennisgreen2 sentences2009See Hawkins v. Dennis, 258 Kan. 329, 342 , 905 P.2d 678 (1995) (unsupported statements of counsel are not evidence of excusable neglect or good faith). 2009See Hawkins v. Dennis, 258 Kan. 329, 342 , 905 P.2d 678 (1995) (unsupported statements of counsel are not evidence of excusable neglect or good faith). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Favelagreen2 sentences2008State v. Tiffany, 267 Kan. 495, 506 , 986 P.2d 1064 (1999); see State v. Favela, 259 Kan. 215, 233-34 , 911 P.2d 792 (1996) (discussing objectives of the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act and concluding those goals provide guidance in determining whether reasons justifying departure are substantial and compelling). 2008State v. Tiffany, 267 Kan. 495, 506 , 986 P.2d 1064 (1999); see State v. Favela, 259 Kan. 215, 233-34 , 911 P.2d 792 (1996) (discussing objectives of the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act and concluding those goals provide guidance in determining whether reasons justifying departure are substantial and compelling). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Friedman v. Kansas State Board of Healing Arts
green
2 sentences2022Friedman v. Kansas State Bd. of Healing Arts, 296 Kan. 636, 644 , 294 P.3d 287 (2013); see also State v. Miller, 308 Kan. 1119 , 1157, 427 P.3d 907 (2018) ("The burden is on the party making a claim of error to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails."). 2022Friedman v. Kansas State Bd. of Healing Arts, 296 Kan. 636, 644 , 294 P.3d 287 (2013); see also State v. Miller, 308 Kan. 1119 , 1157, 427 P.3d 907 (2018) ("The burden is on the party making a claim of error to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails."). | 9 | 2014–2022 |
State v. Hines
green
2 sentences2020However, it may do so only if "'there is evidence in the record to support such factors and the use of the factors would be consistent with the intent and purposes of the sentencing guidelines.' [Citations omitted.]" State v. Hines, 296 Kan. 608, 616 , 294 P.3d 270 (2013). 2020However, it may do so only if "'there is evidence in the record to support such factors and the use of the factors would be consistent with the intent and purposes of the sentencing guidelines.' [Citations omitted.]" State v. Hines, 296 Kan. 608, 616 , 294 P.3d 270 (2013). | 3 | 2014–2024 |
State v. Grady
green
2 sentences1999“When there is reasonable doubt as to whether the legislature necessarily considered a factor in establishing the standard sentence range, the trial court has discretion to use that factor as a reason for issuing a departure sentence.’ Grady, 258 Kan. 72 , Syl. ¶ 7. 1995“When there is reasonable doubt as to whether the legislature necessarily considered a factor in estabhshing the standard sentence range, the trial court has discretion to use that factor as a reason for issuing a departure sentence.” Grady, 258 Kan. 72 , Syl. ¶ 7. | 2 | 1995–1999 |
In re Adoption of T.M.M.H. – Per Curiam
green
2 sentences2024In re Adoption of T.M.M.H., 307 Kan. 902, 917 , 416 P.3d 999 (2018). 2024In re Adoption of T.M.M.H., 307 Kan. 902, 917 , 416 P.3d 999 (2018). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Gant
green
1 sentence2022Gant, 288 Kan. at 85 ; see United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 463 , 116 S. Ct. 1480 , 134 L. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Story
green
2 sentences2022But this court has said that there must be evidence in the record to support an instruction; it will not "'speculate about hypothetical scenarios.'" Stafford, 312 Kan. at 584 (quoting State v. Story, 300 Kan. 702, 710 , 334 P.3d 297 [2014]). 2022But this court has said that there must be evidence in the record to support an instruction; it will not "'speculate about hypothetical scenarios.'" Stafford, 312 Kan. at 584 (quoting State v. Story, 300 Kan. 702, 710 , 334 P.3d 297 [2014]). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Evergreen Recycle, L.L.C. v. Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence2022App. 2d 459, 488 , 350 P.3d 1091 (2015) (citing Friedman, 296 Kan. at 644-45 ) ("The burden is on the party making a claim to designate facts in the record to support that claim; without such a record, the claim of error fails."). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Deist
green
1 sentence2021In Deist, the PSI report listed the aggravated indecent liberties with a child offenses as entry 1 (not scored) and entry 2 (scored) in case No. 97CR596 for criminal history. 44 Kan. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Alford
green
1 sentence2021See State v. Wilson, 308 Kan. 516 , 520, 421 P.3d 742 (2018) (reviewing record in context of motion to withdraw plea); State v. Alford, 308 Kan. 1336 , 1338, 429 P.3d 197 (2018) (reviewing record in context of motion to correct illegal sentence). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
In re Hawver (
green
2 sentences2020In re Hawver, 300 Kan. 1023, 1039 , 339 P.3d 573 (2014) (respondent's argument deemed abandoned or waived if respondent's brief advances argument without proper citation to the record to support that claim). 2020In re Hawver, 300 Kan. 1023, 1039 , 339 P.3d 573 (2014) (respondent's argument deemed abandoned or waived if respondent's brief advances argument without proper citation to the record to support that claim). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Godfrey
green
1 sentence2017"Rule 6.02(a)(5) means what it says and is ignored at a litigant's own peril." Godfrey, 301 Kan. at 1043 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Blackmon
green
1 sentence2013“Sentencing courts may consider other, nonstatutory factors when imposing a departure sentence as long as there is evidence in the record to support such factors and the use of the factors would be consistent with the intent and purposes of die sentencing guidelines. [Citations omitted.]” Blackmon, 285 Kan. at 725 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Tiffany
green
2 sentences2008State v. Tiffany, 267 Kan. 495, 506 , 986 P.2d 1064 (1999); see State v. Favela, 259 Kan. 215, 233-34 , 911 P.2d 792 (1996) (discussing objectives of the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act and concluding those goals provide guidance in determining whether reasons justifying departure are substantial and compelling). 2008State v. Tiffany, 267 Kan. 495, 506 , 986 P.2d 1064 (1999); see State v. Favela, 259 Kan. 215, 233-34 , 911 P.2d 792 (1996) (discussing objectives of the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act and concluding those goals provide guidance in determining whether reasons justifying departure are substantial and compelling). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Richard
green
2 sentences1994State v. Richard, 252 Kan. 872, 874 , 850 P.2d 844 (1993). 1994State v. Richard, 252 Kan. 872, 874 , 850 P.2d 844 (1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.