14 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2023 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
County Court of Ulster Cty. v. Allengreen2 sentences2021Because this permissive presumption leaves the trier of fact free to credit or reject the inference and does not shift the burden of proof, it affects the application of the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard only if, under the facts of the case, there is no rational way the trier could make the connection permitted by the inference. [Citations omitted.]" County Court of Ulster County, N.Y. v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 157 , 99 S. Ct. 2213 , 60 L. 2021Because this permissive presumption leaves the trier of fact free to credit or reject the inference and does not shift the burden of proof, it affects the application of the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard only if, under the facts of the case, there is no rational way the trier could make the connection permitted by the inference. [Citations omitted.]" County Court of Ulster County, N.Y. v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 157 , 99 S. Ct. 2213 , 60 L. | 1 | 3 |
Rucker v. DeLaygreen2 sentences2013Rucker v. DeLay, 295 Kan. 826 , 289 P.3d 1166 (2012) (absent application of a permissive exception for plain error, this court will riot consider any issues not presented in the petition for review or fairly included therein). 2013Rucker v. DeLay, 295 Kan. 826 , 289 P.3d 1166 (2012) (absent application of a permissive exception for plain error, this court will riot consider any issues not presented in the petition for review or fairly included therein). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Plummergreen2 sentences2022This permissive instruction does not fairly and accurately reflect the statutory rebuttable presumption specified in K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5705[e]."); see State v. Plummer, 295 Kan. 156, 161 , 283 P.3d 202 (2012) ("[A]n instruction must always fairly and accurately state the applicable law, and an instruction that does not do so would be legally infirm."); see also K.S.A. 20-203 ("A syllabus of the points of law decided in any case in the supreme court shall be stated in writing by the judge delivering the opinion of the court, which shall be confined to the points of law arising from the facts 2022This permissive instruction does not fairly and accurately reflect the statutory rebuttable presumption specified in K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5705[e]."); see State v. Plummer, 295 Kan. 156, 161 , 283 P.3d 202 (2012) ("[A]n instruction must always fairly and accurately state the applicable law, and an instruction that does not do so would be legally infirm."); see also K.S.A. 20-203 ("A syllabus of the points of law decided in any case in the supreme court shall be stated in writing by the judge delivering the opinion of the court, which shall be confined to the points of law arising from the facts | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Sergio Duran Badillagreen1 sentence2013He first states that “for a permissive presumption [instruction] to be justified, the facts of a particular case must be examined.” (Emphasis added.) But he then cites to a passage in United States v. Badilla, 383 F.3d 1137, 1140 (10th Cir. 2004): “ ‘A permissive inference instruction is valid if there is a rational connection between the fact that the prosecution proved and the ultimate fact presumed.’ ” (Emphasis added.) As stated, we are concerned with an inference instruction, not a presumption instruction. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pricegreen1 sentence1997“No party may assign as error the giving or failure to give an instruction unless objected to before the jury retires to consider its verdict stating distinctly the matter objected to and grounds for the objection, unless the instruction is clearly erroneous.” K.S.A. 22-3414(3); Price, 233 Kan. at 711 (noting defendant’s failure to object to instruction on the permissive presumption created by K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1005 that defendant was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol). “ ‘An instruction is clearly erroneous only if the reviewing court reaches a firm conviction that if the t | 1 | 1 |
State v. Doylegreen2 sentences1980Defendant proposed an instruction based upon what was *268 said in State v. Doyle, 201 Kan. 469, 478, 479 , 441 P.2d 846 (1968). 1980Defendant proposed an instruction based upon what was *268 said in State v. Doyle, 201 Kan. 469, 478, 479 , 441 P.2d 846 (1968). | 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. Egbert
green
2 sentences1980The rationale of the Court of Appeals was adopted in State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 (1980), where we held “[T]he two-sentence instruction given creates ‘a permissive presumption and does not shift the burden of proof to the defendant’ . . . .” We find no reason to change the rule. 1980The rationale of the Court of Appeals was adopted in State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 (1980), where we held “[T]he two-sentence instruction given creates ‘a permissive presumption and does not shift the burden of proof to the defendant’ . . . .” We find no reason to change the rule. | 2 | 1980–1985 |
State v. Acheson
green
2 sentences1985State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. at 179-80 ; State v. Costa, 228 Kan. 308, 320 , 613 P.2d 1359 (1980); State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 965 (1980); State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. 1980The Court of Appeals analysis in State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. | 2 | 1980–1985 |
State v. Valdiviezo-Martinez
green
1 sentence2023State v. Valdiviezo- Martinez, 313 Kan. 614 , 624, 486 P.3d 1256 (2021) (nonjurisdictional issues waived if review not sought); Supreme Court Rule 8.03(b)(6)(C)(i) (2023 Kan. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Francis v. Franklin
green
1 sentence2020And in Francis, which Holder relies on, the United States Supreme Court laid out the proper analysis to determine whether the presumption described in the jury instruction is a mandatory presumption or a permissive presumption. 471 U.S. at 313-14 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Harkness
green
1 sentence2011Ellmaker, 289 Kan. at 1144 ; Harkness, 252 Kan. at 525-27 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Ellmaker
green
1 sentence2011Ellmaker, 289 Kan. at 1144 ; Harkness, 252 Kan. at 525-27 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Castoreno
green
2 sentences1997K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1567(a) provides: “No person shall operate or attempt to operate any vehicle within this state while ... (2) the alcohol concentration in the person’s blood or breath, as meas *627 ured within two hours of the time of 'operating or attempting to operate a vehicle, is .08 or more.” See PIK Crim. 3d 70.01-A. The.district court’s jury instruction set forth K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1567(a)(2) as follows: “That the defendant, while driving or within two hours after he operated or attempted to operate the vehicle had an alcohol concentration in his blood of .08 or more.” Briggs argues 1997K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1567(a) provides: “No person shall operate or attempt to operate any vehicle within this state while ... (2) the alcohol concentration in the person’s blood or breath, as meas *627 ured within two hours of the time of 'operating or attempting to operate a vehicle, is .08 or more.” See PIK Crim. 3d 70.01-A. The.district court’s jury instruction set forth K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1567(a)(2) as follows: “That the defendant, while driving or within two hours after he operated or attempted to operate the vehicle had an alcohol concentration in his blood of .08 or more.” Briggs argues | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Isley
green
2 sentences1997“No party may assign as error the giving or failure to give an instruction unless objected to before the jury retires to consider its verdict stating distinctly the matter objected to and grounds for the objection, unless the instruction is clearly erroneous.” K.S.A. 22-3414(3); Price, 233 Kan. at 711 (noting defendant’s failure to object to instruction on the permissive presumption created by K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1005 that defendant was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol). “ ‘An instruction is clearly erroneous only if the reviewing court reaches a firm conviction that if the t 1997“No party may assign as error the giving or failure to give an instruction unless objected to before the jury retires to consider its verdict stating distinctly the matter objected to and grounds for the objection, unless the instruction is clearly erroneous.” K.S.A. 22-3414(3); Price, 233 Kan. at 711 (noting defendant’s failure to object to instruction on the permissive presumption created by K.S.A. 1996 Supp. 8-1005 that defendant was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol). “ ‘An instruction is clearly erroneous only if the reviewing court reaches a firm conviction that if the t | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Costa
green
2 sentences1985State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. at 179-80 ; State v. Costa, 228 Kan. 308, 320 , 613 P.2d 1359 (1980); State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 965 (1980); State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. 1985State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. at 179-80 ; State v. Costa, 228 Kan. 308, 320 , 613 P.2d 1359 (1980); State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 965 (1980); State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
State v. McDaniel & Owens
green
1 sentence1985State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. at 179-80 ; State v. Costa, 228 Kan. 308, 320 , 613 P.2d 1359 (1980); State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 965 (1980); State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Egbert v. Kansas
green
1 sentence1985State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. at 179-80 ; State v. Costa, 228 Kan. 308, 320 , 613 P.2d 1359 (1980); State v. Egbert, 227 Kan. 266, 267 , 606 P.2d 1022 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 965 (1980); State v. Acheson, 3 Kan. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
State v. Bailey
neutral
2 sentences1983State v. Bailey, 184 Kan. 704, 712 , 339 P.2d 45 (1959). 1983State v. Bailey, 184 Kan. 704, 712 , 339 P.2d 45 (1959). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.