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.
11 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2020 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Vontress v. Statered2 sentences2020Vontress provides a nonexhaustive list of factors which includes: "whether (1) the movant provides persuasive reasons or circumstances that prevented him or her from filing the 60-1507 motion within the 1-year time limitation; (2) the merits of the movant's claim raise substantial issues of law or fact deserving of the district court's consideration; and (3) the movant sets forth a colorable claim of actual innocence, i.e., factual, not legal, innocence." 299 Kan. at 616 . 14 Under Vontress, "courts consider all factors under the totality of the circumstances rather than balancing factors agai 2019Accordingly, this court's decision in Vontress , establishing a nonexhaustive list of factors, would apply here, to-wit: "(1) the movant provides persuasive reasons or circumstances that prevented him or her from filing the 60-1507 motion within the 1-year time limitation; (2) the merits of the movant's claim raise substantial issues of law or fact deserving of the district court's consideration; and (3) the movant sets forth a colorable claim of actual innocence, i.e., factual, not legal, innocence." 299 Kan. at 616 , 325 P.3d 1114 . | 1 | 5 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Vontress provides a nonexhaustive list of factors which includes: "whether (1) the movant provides persuasive reasons or circumstances that prevented him or her from filing the 60-1507 motion within the 1-year time limitation; (2) the merits of the movant's claim raise substantial issues of law or fact deserving of the district court's consideration; and (3) the movant sets forth a colorable claim of actual innocence, i.e., factual, not legal, innocence." 299 Kan. at 616 . 14 Under Vontress, "courts consider all factors under the totality of the circumstances rather than balancing factors agai 2019In evaluating these factors, "courts consider all factors under the totality of the circumstances rather than balancing factors against each other, need not give the factors equal weight, and should not consider any single factor dispositive." White , 308 Kan. at 504 , 421 P.3d 718 . | 1 | 3 |
State v. Abbottgreen2 sentences2020See State v. Abbott, 277 Kan. 161 , Syl. ¶ 5, 83 P.3d 794 (2004); see also PIK Crim. 4th 57.040 (2018 Supp.) (providing a nonexhaustive list of factors that may be relevant to determine whether a defendant possessed a controlled substance). 2020See State v. Abbott, 277 Kan. 161 , Syl. ¶ 5, 83 P.3d 794 (2004); see also PIK Crim. 4th 57.040 (2018 Supp.) (providing a nonexhaustive list of factors that may be relevant to determine whether a defendant possessed a controlled substance). | 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 JA
green
2 sentences2004The child's attachment to the parties; "2. whether there has been any history of sexual, physical, emotional, or substance abuse on the part of any family member; "3. age and health of the parties; "4. whether the child would have siblings close to his age; "5. motivation of the parties for wanting to adopt; "6. potential permanence of the relationship between the child and adopting parents; "7. emotional needs of the child; "8. parenting skills, strength, and weaknesses; and "9. special needs of the child." In re J.A., 30 Kan. 2004The child’s attachment to the parties; “2. whether there has been any histoiy of sexual, physical, emotional, or substance abuse on the part of any family member; “3. age and health of the parties; “4. whether the child would have siblings close to his age; “5. motivation of the parties for wanting to adopt; “6. potential permanence of the relationship between the child and adopting parents; “7. emotional needs of the child; “8. parenting skills, strength, and weaknesses; and “9. special needs of die child.” In re J.A., 30 Kan. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Young
green
1 sentence2020To demarcate that line, our court set forth a nonexhaustive list of factors indicative of a seizure: "activation of sirens or flashers, a command to halt, a display of weapons, or an attempt to control the suspect's ability to flee or the direction of travel during a chase." Young, 37 Kan. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Thompson
green
1 sentence2014Those factors tirattendto establish a voluntary encounter include: ‘knowledge of the right to refuse, a clear communication that die driver is free to terminate die encounter or refuse to answer questions, return of die driver’s license and other documents, and a physical disengagement before further questioning.’ 284 Kan. at 811 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Berriozabal
green
1 sentence2014In determining whether compelling circumstances exist, a district court considers the following nonexhaustive list of factors: “(1) whether there was corroborating evidence of the complaining witness’ version of the facts, (2) whether the complaining witness demonstrates mental instability, (3) whether the complaining witness demonstrates a lack of veracity, (4) whether similar charges by the complaining witness against others are proven to be false, (5) whether the defendant’s motion for a psychological evaluation of the complaining witness appears to be a fishing expedition, and (6) whether | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.