Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 Conn. App. 425 - State v. Cromety

102 Conn. App. 425 - State v. Cromety’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
1
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably 123 Conn. App. 625 - State v. Kendall (2010), State v. Cromety (2007)

43 state decisions

230200720102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · State v. Golding · Jenkins v. Anderson · United States v. Alaska

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It has long been held that [a] prosecutor may not appeal to the emotions, passions and prejudices of the jurors.... When the prosecutor appeals to emotions, he invites the jury to decide the case, not according to a rational appraisal of the evidence, but on the basis of powerful and irrelevant factors which are likely to skew that appraisal.... Therefore, a prosecutor may argue the state's case forcefully, [but] such argument must be fair and based upon the facts in evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom.... Nonetheless, closing arguments often have a rough and tumble quality about them, [and] some leeway must be afforded to the advocates in offering arguments to the jury in final argument. [I]n addressing the jury, [c]ounsel must be allowed a generous latitude in argument, as the limits of legitimate argument and fair comment cannot be determined precisely by rule and line, and something must be allowed for the zeal of counsel in the heat of argument.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[O]ur rules of procedure do not allow a [party] to pursue one course of action at trial and later, on appeal, argue that a path he rejected should now be open to him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is not ... improper for the prosecutor to comment upon the evidence presented at trial and to argue the inferences that the jurors might draw therefrom ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.