13 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2026 5 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. Gonzalezgreen2 sentences2019See State v. James, 309 Kan. 1280 , 1299, 443 P.3d 1063 (2019) (quoting K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 21-5202[j]) (differentiating between degrees of recklessness needed for two crimes; person acts "recklessly," is "reckless" when person consciously disregards substantial, unjustifiable risk "that circumstances exist or that a result will follow, and such disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation"); see also State v. Gonzalez, 307 Kan. 575, 581 , 412 P.3d 968 (2018) (outlining requirements of unintentional second-degree murd 2019See State v. James, 309 Kan. 1280 , 1299, 443 P.3d 1063 (2019) (quoting K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 21-5202[j]) (differentiating between degrees of recklessness needed for two crimes; person acts "recklessly," is "reckless" when person consciously disregards substantial, unjustifiable risk "that circumstances exist or that a result will follow, and such disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation"); see also State v. Gonzalez, 307 Kan. 575, 581 , 412 P.3d 968 (2018) (outlining requirements of unintentional second-degree murd | 2 | 2 |
People v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2017With respect to the specific difference between recklessness and criminal negligence, Hall explained: "Criminal negligence requires that, 'through a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise,' the actor fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur or a circumstance exists. § 18-1-501(3); see also People v. Jones, 193 Colo. 250, 253-54 , 565 P.2d 1333, 1335 (1977) (discussing criminally negligent homicide). 2017With respect to the specific difference between recklessness and criminal negligence, Hall explained: "Criminal negligence requires that, 'through a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise,' the actor fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur or a circumstance exists. § 18-1-501(3); see also People v. Jones, 193 Colo. 250, 253-54 , 565 P.2d 1333, 1335 (1977) (discussing criminally negligent homicide). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Dealgreen2 sentences2019We have previously addressed the differences between the intentional and reckless forms of second-degree murder in State v. Deal , 293 Kan. 872 , 884, 269 P.3d 1282 (2012). 2019Recklessness is not limited to "blind conduct." See James, 309 Kan. at 1299 (quoting State v. Deal, 293 Kan. 872, 884 , 169 P.3d 1282 [2012]) (even intentional blow can result in unintentional but reckless killing; "'[I]t is not the intent to inflict a blow but the intent to kill that is the focal point' of the distinction between intentional second-degree murder and unintentional but reckless second-degree murder."); see also Gentry, 310 Kan. at 727 (evidence reasonably supported theory shooter fired toward truck without intent to kill whoever might be inside). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Plummergreen1 sentence2021See State v. Gentry, 310 Kan. 715 , 721, 449 P.3d 429 (2019) (holding involuntary manslaughter is a lesser included offense of first-degree premeditated murder); Plummer, 295 Kan. at 161 (holding lesser included offense instruction is legally appropriate). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gentrygreen1 sentence2021See State v. Gentry, 310 Kan. 715 , 721, 449 P.3d 429 (2019) (holding involuntary manslaughter is a lesser included offense of first-degree premeditated murder); Plummer, 295 Kan. at 161 (holding lesser included offense instruction is legally appropriate). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jamesgreen1 sentence2019See State v. James, 309 Kan. 1280 , 1299, 443 P.3d 1063 (2019) (quoting K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 21-5202[j]) (differentiating between degrees of recklessness needed for two crimes; person acts "recklessly," is "reckless" when person consciously disregards substantial, unjustifiable risk "that circumstances exist or that a result will follow, and such disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation"); see also State v. Gonzalez, 307 Kan. 575, 581 , 412 P.3d 968 (2018) (outlining requirements of unintentional second-degree murd | 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. Robinson
green
2 sentences2024Regardless, in State v. Robinson, 303 Kan. 11, 284 , 363 P.3d 875 (2015), upon which Collins relies, the Kansas Supreme Court found an instruction erroneous when it found the instruction's language "was incomplete, inaccurate, and confusing." And similarly in State v. Horton, 300 Kan. 477, 491 , 331 P.3d 752 (2014), our Supreme Court stated a reviewing court "considers the instruction as a whole . . . to see whether it properly and fairly stated the law as applied to the facts of the case and could not have reasonably misled the jury." (Emphasis added.) Collins argues the second element of eac 2024Regardless, in State v. Robinson, 303 Kan. 11, 284 , 363 P.3d 875 (2015), upon which Collins relies, the Kansas Supreme Court found an instruction erroneous when it found the instruction's language "was incomplete, inaccurate, and confusing." And similarly in State v. Horton, 300 Kan. 477, 491 , 331 P.3d 752 (2014), our Supreme Court stated a reviewing court "considers the instruction as a whole . . . to see whether it properly and fairly stated the law as applied to the facts of the case and could not have reasonably misled the jury." (Emphasis added.) Collins argues the second element of eac | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Horton
green
2 sentences2024Regardless, in State v. Robinson, 303 Kan. 11, 284 , 363 P.3d 875 (2015), upon which Collins relies, the Kansas Supreme Court found an instruction erroneous when it found the instruction's language "was incomplete, inaccurate, and confusing." And similarly in State v. Horton, 300 Kan. 477, 491 , 331 P.3d 752 (2014), our Supreme Court stated a reviewing court "considers the instruction as a whole . . . to see whether it properly and fairly stated the law as applied to the facts of the case and could not have reasonably misled the jury." (Emphasis added.) Collins argues the second element of eac 2024Regardless, in State v. Robinson, 303 Kan. 11, 284 , 363 P.3d 875 (2015), upon which Collins relies, the Kansas Supreme Court found an instruction erroneous when it found the instruction's language "was incomplete, inaccurate, and confusing." And similarly in State v. Horton, 300 Kan. 477, 491 , 331 P.3d 752 (2014), our Supreme Court stated a reviewing court "considers the instruction as a whole . . . to see whether it properly and fairly stated the law as applied to the facts of the case and could not have reasonably misled the jury." (Emphasis added.) Collins argues the second element of eac | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Krovvidi
green
2 sentences2026Peery relies on State v. Krovvidi, 274 Kan. 1059 , 58 P.3d 687 (2002), to argue that something more, like intoxication or cell phone distraction, is needed to support a vehicular homicide conviction, so something more is also needed to support her reckless involuntary manslaughter conviction. 2026Peery relies on State v. Krovvidi, 274 Kan. 1059 , 58 P.3d 687 (2002), to argue that something more, like intoxication or cell phone distraction, is needed to support a vehicular homicide conviction, so something more is also needed to support her reckless involuntary manslaughter conviction. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Mendez
green
1 sentence2026Standard of Review "When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the evidence in a light most favorable to the State to determine whether a rational fact-finder 22 could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Mendez, 319 Kan. 718 , 723, 559 P.3d 792 (2024). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Hillard
green
1 sentence2025"Generally, jury instructions patterned after statutes are legally proper." State v. Hillard, 315 Kan. 732 , 776, 511 P.3d 883 (2022). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Gatlin
green
2 sentences2020The Kansas Supreme Court has held: "To act recklessly, a defendant must know that he or she is putting others in imminent danger." State v. Gatlin, 292 Kan. 372, 377 , 253 P.3d 357 (2011). 2020The Kansas Supreme Court has held: "To act recklessly, a defendant must know that he or she is putting others in imminent danger." State v. Gatlin, 292 Kan. 372, 377 , 253 P.3d 357 (2011). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Martinez
green
2 sentences2016Clearly, a lesser included offense instruction on reckless second-degree murder would have been legally appropriate because "[r]eckless second-degree murder is a lesser included offense of premeditated first-degree murder." State v. Martinez, 288 Kan. 443, 453 , 204 P.3d 601 (2009). 2016Clearly, a lesser included offense instruction on reckless second-degree murder would have been legally appropriate because "[r]eckless second-degree murder is a lesser included offense of premeditated first-degree murder." State v. Martinez, 288 Kan. 443, 453 , 204 P.3d 601 (2009). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Anderson
green
1 sentence2008This charge required the State to prove “ ‘criminal negligence’ ” which is defined in part as a failure “ ‘to be aware of a substantial and unjus *528 tifiable risk that circumstances exist or a result will follow’ ” and the “ ‘failure constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation.’ ” 108 S.W.3d at 683 (quoting Mo. Rev. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.