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.
19 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2026 12 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re the Care & Treatment of Burchgreen2 sentences2022We apply a de novo standard of review when a person committed under the KSVPA appeals a district court's probable cause determination after an annual review hearing. 296 Kan. at 222-23 . 2022At the annual review hearing, the SVP has the burden to show probable cause "sufficient to cause a person of ordinary prudence and action to conscientiously entertain a reasonable belief that [the committed individual's] mental abnormality or personality disorder had so changed that he [or she] was safe to be placed in transitional release." 296 Kan. at 226 . | 2 | 13 |
Griffin v. Bruffettgreen2 sentences2022App. 2d 589, 598 , 389 P.3d 992 (2017), which held that the filing of the annual evaluation and notice of right or waiver is the "cutoff for challenging the prior year's commitment." To place Merryfield's arguments in the proper context, an overview of the relevant dates as they relate to his annual examinations is helpful: • December 19, 2018: The 2018 annual report, along with Merryfield's signed acknowledgment of receipt and waiver form, is filed in the district court. • December 18, 2019: The 2019 annual report, along with Merryfield's signed acknowledgment of receipt and waiver form, is f 2019After the district court receives the evaluation and notice, it must conduct an annual review hearing. 53 Kan. | 1 | 3 |
In re the Care & Treatment of Ontiberosgreen2 sentences2015K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 59-29a06(b); see also In re Care & Treatment of Ontiberos, 295 Kan. 10, 24-25 , 287 P.3d 855 (2012) (finding due-process right to effective counsel at commitment proceeding under the Act). 2015K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 59-29a06(b); see also In re Care & Treatment of Ontiberos, 295 Kan. 10, 24-25 , 287 P.3d 855 (2012) (finding due-process right to effective counsel at commitment proceeding under the Act). | 1 | 1 |
Crawford v. Hrabegreen2 sentences2010See Crawford v. Hrabe, 273 Kan. 565, 570 , 44 P.3d 442 (2002) (when controlling facts are based upon written or documentary evidence, appellate court has same opportunity as trial court to examine and consider the evidence and to determine de novo what the facts establish). 2010See Crawford v. Hrabe, 273 Kan. 565, 570 , 44 P.3d 442 (2002) (when controlling facts are based upon written or documentary evidence, appellate court has same opportunity as trial court to examine and consider the evidence and to determine de novo what the facts establish). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Care & Treatment of Sipe
green
2 sentences2020Annual Review When a petitioner committed to the sexually violent predator program demands a hearing on his annual review, he or she "bears the burden to establish probable cause at an annual review hearing." Thus, the trial court must "consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the committed person and resolve all conflicting evidence in that person's favor." In re Care & Treatment of Burch, 296 Kan. 215, 225 , 291 P.3d 78 (2012) (citing In re Care & Treatment of Sipe, 44 Kan. 2012Again, we agree with the Sipe panel which reasoned that “because a sexually violent predator bears the burden to establish probable cause at an annual review hearing, the district court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the committed person and resolve all conflicting evidence in that person’s favor.” In re Sipe, 44 Kan. | 2 | 2012–2020 |
In re Care and Treatment of Quillen
green
1 sentence2026K.S.A. 59-29a08(g); In re Care and Treatment of Quillen, 312 Kan. 841 , 851-52, 858, 481 P.3d 791 (2021). 6 We apply a de novo standard of review to a district court's decision at an annual review hearing on whether probable cause existed to believe the person's mental abnormality or personality disorder had so changed that he was safe to be placed in transitional release. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
In Re the Care & Treatment of Twilleger
green
1 sentence2022K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 59-29a08(c); In re Care and Treatment of Twilleger, 46 Kan. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In Re the Care & Treatment of Hay
green
1 sentence2022And despite that fact, the KSVPA meets due process requirements. 263 Kan. at 831 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.
green
2 sentences2010Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 235 Kan. 387, 412 , 681 P.2d 1038 (1984); In re G.M.A., 30 Kan. 2010Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 235 Kan. 387, 412 , 681 P.2d 1038 (1984); In re G.M.A., 30 Kan. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
In Re GMA
neutral
1 sentence2010Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 235 Kan. 387, 412 , 681 P.2d 1038 (1984); In re G.M.A., 30 Kan. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.