historical analysis (Kansas) · Go Syfert
← Kansas issues

historical analysis in Kansas

9 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2026 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 (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Webbgreen
kan · 1988 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996See State v. Webb, 242 Kan. 519 , 748 P.2d 875 (1988) (giving a full historical analysis of allocution).

1996See State v. Webb, 242 Kan. 519 , 748 P.2d 875 (1988) (giving a full historical analysis of allocution).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Apprendi v. New Jersey green
scotus · 2000
2 sentences

2008Recently, these provisions have received renewed attention because of questions regarding the treatment of juvenile adjudications in light of three-strike legislation, sentencing guidelines, and the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 , 147 L.

2008Recently, these provisions have received renewed attention because of questions regarding the treatment of juvenile adjudications in light of three-strike legislation, sentencing guidelines, and the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 , 147 L.

22008–2008
New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen green
scotus · 2022
1 sentence

2026Like all analogical reasoning, determining whether a historical regulation is a proper analogue for a distinctly modern firearm regulation requires a determination of whether the two regulations are 'relevantly similar.' [Citation omitted.]" Bruen, 597 U.S. at 28-29 .

12026–2026
Chapman v. California red
scotus · 1967
1 sentence

2016Chapman, 386 U.S. at 22 .

12016–2016
State v. Thornton green
kan · 1978
2 sentences

2006State v. Thornton, 224 Kan. 127 , 577 P.2d 1190 (1978), appears to be the first case discussing merger in the context of multiplicity (other than in a felony-murder case, e.g., State v. Rueckert, 221 Kan. 727, 734-35 , 561 P.2d 850 [1977]).

2006State v. Thornton, 224 Kan. 127 , 577 P.2d 1190 (1978), appears to be the first case discussing merger in the context of multiplicity (other than in a felony-murder case, e.g., State v. Rueckert, 221 Kan. 727, 734-35 , 561 P.2d 850 [1977]).

12006–2006
State v. Rueckert green
kan · 1977
2 sentences

2006State v. Thornton, 224 Kan. 127 , 577 P.2d 1190 (1978), appears to be the first case discussing merger in the context of multiplicity (other than in a felony-murder case, e.g., State v. Rueckert, 221 Kan. 727, 734-35 , 561 P.2d 850 [1977]).

2006State v. Thornton, 224 Kan. 127 , 577 P.2d 1190 (1978), appears to be the first case discussing merger in the context of multiplicity (other than in a felony-murder case, e.g., State v. Rueckert, 221 Kan. 727, 734-35 , 561 P.2d 850 [1977]).

12006–2006
State v. Lopez green
kan · 2001
2 sentences

2004State v. Lopez, 271 Kan. 119, 139 , 22 P.3d 1040 (2001).

2004State v. Lopez, 271 Kan. 119, 139 , 22 P.3d 1040 (2001).

12004–2004
Bowers v. Ottenad green
kan · 1986
2 sentences

1994When the injury or damage results from the condition of the premises as opposed to the activity thereon, the duty of the occupier to the licensee is only to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring the licensee.” 240 Kan. 208 , Syl. ¶ 4.

1994When the injury or damage results from the condition of the premises as opposed to the activity thereon, the duty of the occupier to the licensee is only to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring the licensee." 240 Kan. 208 , Syl. ¶ 4.

11994–1994
Fretwell v. Carter neutral
· 1908
1 sentence

1968Ed. 2d 542 , 78 S. Ct. 531 , this court rejected a similar contention advanced here, and in doing so, reaffirmed the doctrine of LaHarpe and Kansas-Nebraska, and said: . . the production and distribution of natural gas for light, fuel and power is a business of a public nature, the control of which belongs to the state . . .” (1. c. 460.) We need not pursue the subject further, and again reiterate the historical doctrine prevailing in the decisions of this court and in our statute that the production, transportation, distribution and sale of natural gas for light, fuel and power is a business

11968–1968

Statutes the citing opinions construe

KS § K.S.A. § 21-4701 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 85 (1962–2026) OR 83 (1945–2025) IL 57 (1978–2026) WA 38 (1984–2026) TX 32 (1971–2025) MI 27 (1971–2025) UT 27 (1991–2025) NJ 26 (1964–2024) WI 26 (1976–2022) PA 25 (1973–2024) CT 22 (1974–2017) NM 21 (1982–2025) FL 20 (1959–2025) NY 18 (1881–2023) IN 18 (1984–2025) GA 16 (1986–2025) OH 16 (1996–2025) MD 13 (1949–2022) LA 10 (1955–2016) AZ 10 (1970–2012) KS 9 (1968–2026) MO 9 (1988–2018) NC 9 (1976–2025) DE 8 (1977–2025) OK 8 (1958–2008) CO 8 (1987–2014) IA 7 (2001–2025) WV 7 (1974–2017) VA 7 (1996–2025) DC 7 (1980–2026) VT 6 (1988–2021) SC 6 (1984–2021) AR 5 (1988–2019) MN 5 (1991–2023) RI 5 (1981–2017) MT 4 (2016–2024) WY 4 (1990–2007) KY 4 (1978–2026) ID 4 (1976–2008) NV 3 (1989–2024) TN 3 (1994–2022) AL 3 (1993–1996) MA 3 (2012–2025) MS 3 (1985–1993) HI 3 (1982–2005) ME 3 (1976–2022) SD 2 (2009–2020) ND 2 (1980–1986) VI 2 (1979–2015) NH 2 (2004–2019)

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