23 Kansas opinions name it 3 courts 1958–2021 2 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. Woodardgreen2 sentences2021See State v. Woodard, 294 Kan. 717, 722 , 280 P.3d 203 (2012) (given sex offenders' higher risk to reoffend, the State has a particularly compelling interest in 3 incarcerating offenders to protect children); State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796, 809, 823-24 , 248 P.3d 256 (2011) (noting legislative intent to punish and incapacitate offenders and that unlike other sentencing statutes, which permit upward and downward departures, a hard 25 sentence is a maximum sentence with no place to depart but down). 2021See State v. Woodard, 294 Kan. 717, 722 , 280 P.3d 203 (2012) (given sex offenders' higher risk to reoffend, the State has a particularly compelling interest in 3 incarcerating offenders to protect children); State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796, 809, 823-24 , 248 P.3d 256 (2011) (noting legislative intent to punish and incapacitate offenders and that unlike other sentencing statutes, which permit upward and downward departures, a hard 25 sentence is a maximum sentence with no place to depart but down). | 2 | 2 |
Clements v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.green2 sentences1995See also Clements v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 243 Kan. 124, 127 , 753 P.2d 1274 (1988) (stating that the test for due process is "whether the legislative means selected has a real and substantial relation to the objective sought") (citing State ex rel. 1995See also Clements v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 243 Kan. 124, 127 , 753 P.2d 1274 (1988) (stating that the test for due process is "whether the legislative means selected has a real and substantial relation to the objective sought") (citing State ex rel. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Starksgreen2 sentences2007Standard of Review "Whenever a defendant is sentenced to a presumptive sentence and there is no claim of error in regard to crime severity level or criminal history, there is a strong legislative presumption that the sentence is not the result of partiality, prejudice, oppression, or corrupt motive.” State v. Starks, 20 Kan. 1998He asserts his sentence resulted from “ ‘oppression’ due to the failure to allow the defendant to exercise this statutory right.” When a defendant receives a presumptive sentence and he or she does not claim an error in crime severity level or criminal history, “there is a strong legislative presumption that the sentence is not the result of partiality, prejudice, oppression, or corrupt motive.” State v. Starks, 20 Kan. | 1 | 8 |
State v. Spencergreen2 sentences2021See State v. Woodard, 294 Kan. 717, 722 , 280 P.3d 203 (2012) (given sex offenders' higher risk to reoffend, the State has a particularly compelling interest in 3 incarcerating offenders to protect children); State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796, 809, 823-24 , 248 P.3d 256 (2011) (noting legislative intent to punish and incapacitate offenders and that unlike other sentencing statutes, which permit upward and downward departures, a hard 25 sentence is a maximum sentence with no place to depart but down). 2021See State v. Woodard, 294 Kan. 717, 722 , 280 P.3d 203 (2012) (given sex offenders' higher risk to reoffend, the State has a particularly compelling interest in 3 incarcerating offenders to protect children); State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796, 809, 823-24 , 248 P.3d 256 (2011) (noting legislative intent to punish and incapacitate offenders and that unlike other sentencing statutes, which permit upward and downward departures, a hard 25 sentence is a maximum sentence with no place to depart but down). | 1 | 2 |
Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fundgreen2 sentences1996Rather, immunity was provided to "`"protect the integrity of the legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators."`" 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). 1996Rather, immunity was provided to “ ‘ “protect the integrity of the' legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators.” ’ ” 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , Quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). | 1 | 2 |
Coate v. Omholtgreen1 sentence2015See Coate, 203 Mont, at 490-91 (supplying justice’s affidavit to the parties). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Scalesgreen2 sentences2007App. 2d 179 , Syl. ¶ 9, *614 885 P.2d 387 (1994); see State v. Scales, 261 Kan. 734, 737 , 933 P.2d 737 (1997). 2007App. 2d 179 , Syl. ¶ 9, *614 885 P.2d 387 (1994); see State v. Scales, 261 Kan. 734, 737 , 933 P.2d 737 (1997). | 1 | 1 |
David Delahoussaye v. City of New Iberiagreen1 sentence1997Thus, establishment of such a CE requirement is a "rational means of advancing a legitimate legislative purpose." Delahoussaye v. City of New Iberia , supra at 149. | 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. Garnes
green
2 sentences2005As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Winters, 276 Kan. 34, 42 , 72 P.3d 564 (2003). 2005As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Winters, 276 Kan. 34, 42 , 72 P.3d 564 (2003). | 2 | 2003–2005 |
Mobile, Jackson & Kansas City Railroad v. Turnipseed
green
2 sentences1995The Court held that a legislative presumption of one fact from evidence of another does not constitute a denial of due process of law if there is “some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed” and if “the inference of one fact from proof of another” is not “so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate.” 219 U.S. at 43 . 1995The Court held that a legislative presumption of one fact from evidence of another does not constitute a denial of due process of law if there is "some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed" and if "the inference of one fact from proof of another" is not "so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate." 219 U.S. at 43 . | 2 | 1995–1995 |
State v. Bailey
green
1 sentence2017Bailey did not, however, hold that sufficient notice must necessarily be given at arraignment; it simply held that the legislative requirement of notice at arraignment was constitutionally adequate. 251 Kan. at 167-69 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Illinois v. Krull
green
1 sentence2015That precedent provides: “A statute cannot support objectively reasonable reliance if, in passing the statute, the legislature wholly abandoned its responsibility to enact constitutional laws.” 480 U.S. at 355 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Winters
green
2 sentences2005As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Winters, 276 Kan. 34, 42 , 72 P.3d 564 (2003). 2005As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.’ [Citation omitted.]” State v. Winters, 276 Kan. 34, 42 , 72 P.3d 564 (2003). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Garcia
green
2 sentences2003As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.” State v. Garcia, 272 Kan. 140, 145 , 32 P.3d 188 (2001). 2003As a result, the defendant’s convictions must be analyzed not only under the traditional elements test as set forth in [State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 372-73 , 624 P.2d 448 (1981),] but also under the legislative test for determining whether one offense is an included offense of the other.” State v. Garcia, 272 Kan. 140, 145 , 32 P.3d 188 (2001). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State Ex Rel. Stephan v. Kansas House of Representatives
green
2 sentences1996Rather, immunity was provided to "`"protect the integrity of the legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators."`" 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). 1996Rather, immunity was provided to “ ‘ “protect the integrity of the' legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators.” ’ ” 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , Quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
United States v. Brewster
green
2 sentences1996Rather, immunity was provided to "`"protect the integrity of the legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators."`" 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). 1996Rather, immunity was provided to “ ‘ “protect the integrity of the' legislative process by insuring the independence of individual legislators.” ’ ” 236 Kan. at 55 (quoting Eastland, 421 U.S. at 502-03 , Quoting Brewster, 408 U.S. at 507 ). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
United States v. Johnson
green
2 sentences1984Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund, 421 U.S. at 501 ; United States v. Johnson, 383 U.S. at 180 . 1984Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. at 501 ; United States v. Johnson, 383 U.S. at 180 . | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc.
green
2 sentences1984The doctrine of legislative immunity arising out of the Speech or Debate Clause was summarized by the Supreme Court in Supreme Court of Va. v. Consumers Union, 446 U.S. at 731 -32: “We have already decided that the Speech or Debate Clause immunizes Congressmen from suits for either prospective relief or damages. 1984The doctrine of legislative immunity arising out of the Speech or Debate Clause was summarized by the Supreme Court in Supreme Court of Va. v. Consumers Union, 446 U.S. at 731 -32: "We have already decided that the Speech or Debate Clause immunizes Congressmen from suits for either prospective relief or damages. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Board of Education v. Board of Education
neutral
2 sentences1967(Board of Education of Haysville v. Board of Education of Wichita, 194 Kan. 450 , 399 P. 2d 539 .) A brief resumé of pertinent portions of the statutes will provide *118 the legislative framework for a better understanding of the issues presented in this appeal. 1967(Board of Education of Haysville v. Board of Education of Wichita, 194 Kan. 450 , 399 P. 2d 539 .) A brief resumé of pertinent portions of the statutes will provide *118 the legislative framework for a better understanding of the issues presented in this appeal. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
First National Bank v. Bank of Cottage Grove
green
2 sentences1959Bank v. Bank of Cottage Grove, 59 Or. 388 ( 117 Pac. 293 ); Brannan’s Neg. 1959Bank v. Bank of Cottage Grove, 59 Or. 388 ( 117 Pac. 293 ); Brannan’s Neg. | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Blum v. Engelman
green
1 sentence1958(See Carroll v. Schwartz, supra; Blum v. Engelman, 190 Md. 109 , 57 Atl. 2d 421.) We agree. | 1 | 1958–1958 |
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.