 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Gonzalez, No. 91,469,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Psychologist's expert opinion that defendant was incompetent to stand trial was inadmissible on the ground that it was based on hearsay because California records were not qualified and admitted under an exception to the hearsay rule, and therefore psychologist could not base opinion her on them under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-456(b).
|
|||||
| State v. Gunby, No. 91,406,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After holding that courts should no longer admit other crimes evidence independent of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-455, court held that admission of two witnesses' testimony about prior violence between defendant and victim would have survived § 60-455's explicit relevance inquiries and particularized weighing of probative value and prejudicial effect.
|
|||||
| State v. Moody, No. 92,248,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant received notice in the complaint of the severity level of DUI offense charged and was informed later at plea hearing of the maximum penalty for a fourth DUI offense, defendant was appropriately sentenced as a fourth-time DUI offender under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 8-1567, even though the complaint alleged only 2 or more prior offenses.
|
|||||
| State v. Reed, No. 93,430,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of defendant's motion to change judge under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 20-311d(a) did not violate his due process rights because he failed to proved actual bias or prejudice; fact that he was sentenced to a hard 50 life sentence did not prove that judge was biased because findings concerning aggravating and mitigating factors was supported by record.
|
|||||
| State v. Rogers, No. 92,814,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of felony murder based on theft by exertion of unauthorized control, the conviction was reversed, and he was retried for felony murder for theft by obtaining unauthorized control, his conviction did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because he was retried for the same crime under the remaining alternate theories.
|
|||||
| State v. Sanchez, No. 93,694,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though aggravated battery could not serve as an inherently dangerous felony for application of felony murder rule, because the aggravated battery inflicted on the victim was not so distinct as to not be an ingredient in his homicide, a new trial was not necessary because child abuse conviction did not merge with the felony murder conviction.
|
|||||
| State v. Snow, No. 93,749,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Recording of conversation between defendant and bail bondsman when defendant was incarcerated for unrelated crimes was properly admitted because evidence was ambiguous; thus, it was reasonable for district court to believe that phone monitor listened to live phone conversation of defendant rather than a recording of the conversation.
|
|||||
| Stemple v. Md. Cas. Co., No. 96,173,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The answer to a certified question was determined. The exclusivity provision of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-501(b) did not bar an injured worker's recovery against the employer's insurance company for underinsurance coverage when he or she had already received workers compensation benefits from the employer.
|
|||||
| Sumner v. Meier's Ready Mix, Inc., No. 93,546,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals erred by reweighing evidence presented to workers compensation board about whether widow of driver killed in accident while driving his employer's loaded flatbed truck home to deal with personal emergency fell within traveling exception to going and coming rule, Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-508(f), in order to rule his death compensable.
|
|||||
| Wachter Mgmt. Co. v. Dexter & Chaney, Inc., No. 95,102,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, October 27, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In buyer's breach of contract action, denial of the seller's motion to dismiss was proper as the forum selection clause in a software licensing agreement, which arrived with the software after the contract was formed, was not enforceable against the buyer as it constituted a proposal to modify the contract's terms under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-209.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
