Supreme Court of Kansas· 10/27/2006

State v. Snow

Citations

144 P.3d 729
282 Kan. 323
2006 Kan. LEXIS 657

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the prosecutor’s argument in closing that “the defendant wants his jury trial, he’s had his jury trial, and its [sic] time to put an end to this nonsense” (1
stating that “defendants . . . for whom a statute is constitutionally applied cannot challenge the constitutionality of the statute on the grounds that the statute may conceivably be applied unconstitutionally in circumstances other than those before the court”
criminal statutes must be strictly construed in favor of the accused with any reasonable doubt as to the meaning of the statute decided in favor of the accused
criminal statutes must be strictly construed in favor of the accused with any reasonable doubt as to the meaning of the statute decided in favor of the accused
not stating third exception; stating exception as applying to “newly asserted theory that is strictly a question of law and its consideration is necessary to serve the ends of justice”
issues related to the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution raise questions of law, requiring an appellate court to apply a de novo standard of review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rosen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

35 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.