consideration factors in Kansas

9 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1963–2022 1 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.

Followed or applied (2)

Case	Followed	Cited
Martin v. Kansas Department of Revenuegreen kan · 2008 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 1 sentence 2013See Martin, 285 Kan. at 647 (Rosen, J., dissenting) (“I agree with the majority’s well-reasoned opinion up to the point that it declines to apply the exclusionary rule in this context. ...	1	1
State v. Edgargreen kan · 2006 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008See State v. Edgar, 281 Kan. 30, 38 , 127 P.3d 986 (2006) (abuse of discretion may be found if the trial court’s decision fails to properly consider statutory standards). 2008See State v. Edgar, 281 Kan. 30, 38 , 127 P.3d 986 (2006) (abuse of discretion may be found if the trial court’s decision fails to properly consider statutory standards).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (15)

Case	Cited	Years
Michigan v. Bryant green scotus · 2011 2 sentences 2022Finally, the Bryant court also noted that a victim's medical condition is a relevant consideration in the analysis of whether the statements were testimonial. 562 U.S. at 368 - 13 69. 2022On the one hand, statements made by a "severely injured victim" like Mathews may not be sufficiently credible or reliable because the responses to questions may be "simply reflexive." 562 U.S. at 368-69 .	1	2022–2022
Board of County Commissioners v. City of Park City green kan · 2011 2 sentences 2019Further, we note that the issue of whether Bowles brought the viability of the doctrine into question in nonjurisdictional settings was not presented to or decided by the court in Finley ." (Emphasis added.) 293 Kan. at 118 -19 , 260 P.3d 387 . 2019Further, we note that the issue of whether Bowles brought the viability of the doctrine into question in nonjurisdictional settings was not presented to or decided by the court in Finley ." (Emphasis added.) 293 Kan. at 118 -19 , 260 P.3d 387 .	1	2019–2019
In re Rumsey green kan · 2015 1 sentence 2018For actual prejudice, this court has employed nine factors, to-wit: "(1) the degree of publicity circulated through the community; (2) the degree the publicity circulated through areas to which venue could be changed; (3) the length of time from the dissemination of the publicity to the trial date; (4) the care exercised and ease encountered in jury selection; (5) the familiarity with publicity and its resultant effects upon prospective jurors or trial jurors; (6) challenges exercised by the defendant in jury selection, both peremptory and for cause; (7) the connection of government officials	1	2018–2018
State v. Hudgins green kan · 2015 2 sentences 2018For actual prejudice, this court has employed nine factors, to-wit: "(1) the degree of publicity circulated through the community; (2) the degree the publicity circulated through areas to which venue could be changed; (3) the length of time from the dissemination of the publicity to the trial date; (4) the care exercised and ease encountered in jury selection; (5) the familiarity with publicity and its resultant effects upon prospective jurors or trial jurors; (6) challenges exercised by the defendant in jury selection, both peremptory and for cause; (7) the connection of government officials 2018For actual prejudice, this court has employed nine factors, to-wit: "(1) the degree of publicity circulated through the community; (2) the degree the publicity circulated through areas to which venue could be changed; (3) the length of time from the dissemination of the publicity to the trial date; (4) the care exercised and ease encountered in jury selection; (5) the familiarity with publicity and its resultant effects upon prospective jurors or trial jurors; (6) challenges exercised by the defendant in jury selection, both peremptory and for cause; (7) the connection of government officials	1	2018–2018
State v. Riley green kanctapp · 1999 1 sentence 2001In Riley , the Court of Appeals held that under the circumstances of that case, the trial court’s refusal to instruct on aggravated battery as a lesser included offense of attempted first-degree murder was reversible error. 26 Kan.	1	2001–2001
United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co. green scotus · 1965 2 sentences 1977Ever since the decision in Rayne Field [United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co., 381 U.S. 392 , 14 L.Ed.2d 466 , 85 S.Ct. 1517 ] the Supreme Court has made it clear that neither the form of the transaction nor the peculiarities of state law are controlling in determining whether there is a jurisdictional sale of gas under the Act. `A regulatory statute such as the Natural Gas Act would be hamstrung if it were tied down to technical concepts of local law.' 381 U.S. 392, 400 , 85 S.Ct. 1517, 1522 , 14 L.Ed.2d 466, 472 ...." (p. 114.) The court in Huber refused to decide the question of 1977Ever since the decision in Rayne Field [United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co., 381 U.S. 392 , 14 L.Ed.2d 466 , 85 S.Ct. 1517 ] the Supreme Court has made it clear that neither the form of the transaction nor the peculiarities of state law are controlling in determining whether there is a jurisdictional sale of gas under the Act. `A regulatory statute such as the Natural Gas Act would be hamstrung if it were tied down to technical concepts of local law.' 381 U.S. 392, 400 , 85 S.Ct. 1517, 1522 , 14 L.Ed.2d 466, 472 ...." (p. 114.) The court in Huber refused to decide the question of	1	1977–1977
State ex rel. Beck v. Fox Kansas Theatre Co. green kan · 1936 2 sentences 1970“We believe it would be stretching the statute to the breaking point to give it an interpretation that would make such programs a crime. . . .” (pp. 293, 294.) We are aware, not only of the foreign authorities cited by the state in which give-away programs have been held to violate lottery laws, but also of our own decision in State, ex rel., v. Fox Kansas Theatre Co., 144 Kan. 687 , 62 P. 2d 929 , where a “bank night” plan was held to constitute a lottery in violation of 21-1501. 1970“We believe it would be stretching the statute to the breaking point to give it an interpretation that would make such programs a crime. . . .” (pp. 293, 294.) We are aware, not only of the foreign authorities cited by the state in which give-away programs have been held to violate lottery laws, but also of our own decision in State, ex rel., v. Fox Kansas Theatre Co., 144 Kan. 687 , 62 P. 2d 929 , where a “bank night” plan was held to constitute a lottery in violation of 21-1501.	1	1970–1970
State Ex Rel. Fatzer v. Kansas Turnpike Authority green kan · 1954 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
Rathbone v. Hopper neutral kan · 1896 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
In re Sanders green kan · 1893 1 sentence 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
State Ex Rel. Moore v. City of Wichita green kan · 1959 1 sentence 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
State ex rel. Smith v. McCombs green kan · 1930 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
City of Lawrence v. Robb neutral kan · 1954 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
Water District No. 1 v. Robb green kan · 1957 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963
STATE, EX REL. v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City green kan · 1956 2 sentences 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335 1963Those who are interested in pursuing further the construction, purpose, and effect of section 16, article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Kansas should see In re Sanders, Petitioner, 53 Kan. 191 , 36 Pac. 348 ; Rathbone v. Hopper, 57 Kan. 240 , 45 Pac. 610 ; State, ex rel., v. McCombs, 129 Kan. 834 , 284 Pac. 618 ; City of Lawrence v. Robb, 175 Kan. 495 , 265 P. 2d 317 ; State, ex rel., v. Kansas Turnpike Authority, 176 Kan. 683 , 273 P. 2d 198 ; State, ex rel., v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City, 179 Kan. 435 , 296 P. 2d 656 ; State, ex rel., v. City of Wichita, 184 Kan. 197 , 335	1	1963–1963

Where else courts name it

CA 119 (1856–2026) NY 105 (1843–2025) IL 104 (1883–2026) CT 74 (1941–2026) OH 68 (1903–2026) AL 67 (1855–2015) PA 65 (1923–2026) TX 64 (1884–2025) IN 45 (1857–2026) MI 42 (1908–2023) MO 37 (1876–2024) TN 35 (1986–2022) OR 34 (1888–2026) FL 32 (1879–2021) NJ 32 (1951–2022) VA 31 (1919–2026) GA 30 (1898–2021) NC 29 (1883–2021) WA 28 (1895–2025) KY 28 (1858–2026) LA 24 (1937–2024) MA 24 (1860–2023) MD 23 (1909–2016) AR 20 (1909–2026) CO 20 (1890–2025) WI 19 (1892–2022) MN 18 (1887–2018) SC 16 (1941–2022) ID 16 (1932–2019) UT 14 (1901–2025) NM 13 (1939–2021) WV 13 (1904–2026) IA 12 (1876–2021) RI 12 (1971–2014) OK 12 (1919–2010) MS 10 (1909–2025) AZ 10 (1989–2023) DC 9 (1988–2008) MT 9 (1929–2020) NE 9 (1906–2025) KS 9 (1963–2022) WY 7 (1912–2025) ME 6 (1969–2023) DE 6 (1962–2018) VT 6 (1850–2023) AK 4 (1986–2020) NH 3 (1984–2013) HI 3 (1920–2013) NV 3 (2013–2022) ND 3 (1919–2001) SD 2 (1959–2019) PR 2 (1916–1954)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check