Supreme Court of Kansas· 4/22/2005

State v. White

Citations

279 Kan. 326
109 P.3d 1199
2005 Kan. LEXIS 156

How courts have described this case

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

holding that alleged improper statements by prosecutor did not constitute “prosecutorial error”
applying de novo standard to reverse exclusion of expert psychological testimony regarding mental disease or defect; evidence admissible under K.S.A. 22-3220; because evidence integral part of theory of defense, exclusion violated fundamental right to fair trial
“[W]hile we have said that the admissibility of evidence is often within the discretion of the district judge, constitutional considerations still prevail. [Citation omitted.]”
“[A]buse-of-discretion standard does not mean a mistake of law is beyond appellate correction. A district court by definition abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law.”
interpretation of the evidentiary statute K.S.A. 22-3220 is a question of law
“ ‘A district court by definition abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law. . . . The abuse-of-discretion standard includes review to determine that the discretion was not guided by erroneous legal conclusions.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nuss

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

23 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.