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.
9 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2019–2024 6 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. Colemangreen2 sentences2022The dispositional departure exception "applies only to probationers whose offenses or crimes of conviction occurred on or after July 1, 2017." State v. Coleman, 311 Kan. 332 , 337, 460 P.3d 828 (2020). 2021PER CURIAM: The Kansas Supreme Court has made it clear that the dispositional departure exception in K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 22-3716(c)(9)(B) "applies only to probationers whose offenses or crimes of conviction occurred on or after July 1, 2017." State v. Coleman, 311 Kan. 332 , 337, 460 P.3d 828 (2020). | 1 | 4 |
State v. Tafollagreen1 sentence2024See, e.g., State v. Tafolla, 315 Kan. 324 , 330, 508 P.3d 351 (2022) (confirming that the dispositional departure exception [K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 22- 3716(c)(9)(B)] does not require particularized findings and finding no error of law in the district court's decision to bypass graduated sanctions in probation violation case without explicit findings); see also State v. Gregory, No. 113,207, 2017 WL 1104475 , at *3 (Kan. 18 App. 2017 ) (unpublished opinion) (withdrawal of plea for "good cause" does not require express findings for all relevant factors). | 1 | 1 |
Vontress v. Statered2 sentences2019See Vontress v. State, 299 Kan. 607, 614 , 325 P.3d 1114 (2014) (defining "manifest injustice" as "obviously unfair," when considering the timeliness of K.S.A. 60-1507 motions). 9 We are not persuaded. 2019See Vontress v. State, 299 Kan. 607, 614 , 325 P.3d 1114 (2014) (defining "manifest injustice" as "obviously unfair," when considering the timeliness of K.S.A. 60-1507 motions). 9 We are not persuaded. | 1 | 1 |
Weaver v. Grahamgreen2 sentences2019See 2018 WL 6580094 , at *3-4 (citing Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24, 28-29 , 101 S. Ct. 960 , 67 L. 2019See 2018 WL 6580094 , at *3-4 (citing Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24, 28-29 , 101 S. Ct. 960 , 67 L. | 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. Duran
green
1 sentence2022Instead, he relies on Duran's alternative holding: a district court cannot bypass intermediate sanctions based on the dispositional departure exception unless the court expressly acknowledges at the revocation hearing that the probation resulted from a dispositional departure. 56 Kan. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Salary
green
2 sentences2021The "failure to support a point with pertinent authority or show why it is sound despite a lack of supporting authority . . . is akin to failing to brief the issue." State v. Salary, 309 Kan. 479, 481 , 437 P.3d 953 (2019). 2021The "failure to support a point with pertinent authority or show why it is sound despite a lack of supporting authority . . . is akin to failing to brief the issue." State v. Salary, 309 Kan. 479, 481 , 437 P.3d 953 (2019). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Tearney
neutral
1 sentence2020App. 2d 601 , 606-08, 457 P.3d 178 (2019) (finding K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 22-3716[c][12] allowed retroactive application of the dispositional departure exception added to the sanctioning scheme in a 2017 amendment). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
White v. State
green
1 sentence2019Tearney relies on the premise that "courts do not give retroactive effect to changes in the law when doing so would result in manifest injustice." White v. State, 308 Kan. 491 , 502, 421 P.3d 718 (2018). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.