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.
10 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2022 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. Belchergreen2 sentences2005See State v. Belcher, 269 Kan. 2, 4-5 , 4 P.3d 1137 (2000). 2005See State v. Belcher, 269 Kan. 2, 4-5 , 4 P.3d 1137 (2000). | 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. Hensley
green
2 sentences2022The court explained the identity of elements test (calling it the "same- elements test") is merely a rule of construction used to determine whether the Legislature intended to punish the same conduct under the two statutes. 298 Kan. at 435-36 . 2022The court held that as a result, this statute "supplants the same-elements test" or the identity of elements test. 298 Kan. at 436 . | 2 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Brueninger
green
2 sentences1997The statute “incorporates two key concepts — the compulsory joinder rule and the identity of elements rule.” 238 Kan. at 432 . 1997Thus, the court held that “the State was not barred from prosecuting the DUI charge in Shawnee County under the identity of elements test.” 238 Kan. at 435-36 . | 2 | 1997–1999 |
In Re Berkowitz
green
2 sentences1999In State v. Brueninger, 238 Kan. 429, 432 , 710 P.2d 1325 (1985), the court referred to In re Berkowitz, 3 Kan. 1999The Court of Appeals noted that these rules are both embodied in one subsection with two clauses separated by a semicolon. 3 Kan. | 2 | 1985–1999 |
Coverly v. State
green
2 sentences1985The distinction between the compulsory joinder rule and the identity of elements test was recognized in Coverly v. State, 208 Kan. 670 , 493 P.2d 261 (1972), and in State v. Edgington, 223 Kan. 413 , 573 P.2d 1059 (1978). 1985The distinction between the compulsory joinder rule and the identity of elements test was recognized in Coverly v. State, 208 Kan. 670 , 493 P.2d 261 (1972), and in State v. Edgington, 223 Kan. 413 , 573 P.2d 1059 (1978). | 2 | 1979–1985 |
State v. McCarley
green
1 sentence2008The panel rejected McCarley’s argument that “lesser included offenses must be based solely on an identity of elements test.” McCarley, 38 Kan. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Schoonover
green
2 sentences2007The terms `gross negligence,' `culpable negligence,' `wanton negligence' and `wantonness' are included within the term `recklessness' as used in this code." McCarley's argument is erroneously based on the holding in State v. Schoonover, 281 Kan. 453 , 133 P.3d 48 (2006), and also the claim that lesser included offenses must be based solely on an identity of elements test. 2007The terms `gross negligence,' `culpable negligence,' `wanton negligence' and `wantonness' are included within the term `recklessness' as used in this code." McCarley's argument is erroneously based on the holding in State v. Schoonover, 281 Kan. 453 , 133 P.3d 48 (2006), and also the claim that lesser included offenses must be based solely on an identity of elements test. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Johnson
green
1 sentence2007Applying the identity of elements test, we have no difficulty concluding that all of the elements of the lesser included offense are among the statutory elements required to prove the principal crime charged. [Citation omitted.]” 34 Kan. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Mahlandt
neutral
1 sentence1999The appellant’s conviction of robbery in the Sedgwick County trial court was erroneous and his conviction on this count is reversed.” 231 Kan. at 670 . *548 K.S.A. 21-3108(2)(a) incorporates two key concepts: (1) the compulsory joinder rule under the first clause, and (2) the identity of elements rule under the second clause. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Edgington
green
2 sentences1985The distinction between the compulsory joinder rule and the identity of elements test was recognized in Coverly v. State, 208 Kan. 670 , 493 P.2d 261 (1972), and in State v. Edgington, 223 Kan. 413 , 573 P.2d 1059 (1978). 1985The distinction between the compulsory joinder rule and the identity of elements test was recognized in Coverly v. State, 208 Kan. 670 , 493 P.2d 261 (1972), and in State v. Edgington, 223 Kan. 413 , 573 P.2d 1059 (1978). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.