Supreme Court of Kansas· 4/17/1998

State v. Higgenbotham

Citations

957 P.2d 416
264 Kan. 593
1998 Kan. LEXIS 89

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

inferring tire absence of any mitigating circumstances when the district court failed to make any findings on the record regarding mitigating circumstances
although court mentions challenge to sufficiency of evidence on talcing and confinement, it discusses only challenge to sufficiency of evidence on force, threat, or deception
although court mentions challenge to sufficiency of evidence on taking and confinement, it discusses only challenge to sufficiency of evidence on force, threat, or deception
Section 10 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights also protects the accused's exercise of their privilege not to testify
test is whether rational factfinder could have found each means beyond a reasonable doubt
prosecutor's repeated references to defendant as a man with many secrets were not a comment on defendant's decision not to testify but were permissible references to evidence regarding defendant's secretive conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Six

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.