104 Conn. App. 627 - State v. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited
18 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Franks v. Delaware · State v. Golding · Aronson v. Brown · In re Adam R.
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Defense Counsel]: ... I’d like to know whether the court is going to charge the jury as a matter of law that—on count two, that the alleged perjury was material to that— “The Court: The answer to that is yes. “[Defense Counsel]: Okay. Thank you. “The Court: I will tell them that pursuant to the definition of materiality, that the [defendant’s] testimony was indeed material and that it was capable of influencing the issue before the court at the time.” Defense counsel did not object. The court then instructed the jury that as a matter of law, the defendant’s testimony was material. 17 “Waiver is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege. ... It involves the idea of assent, and assent is an act of understanding. . . . The rule is applicable that no one shall be permitted to deny that he intended the natural consequences of his acts and conduct. ... In order to waive a claim of law it is not necessary . . . that a party be certain of the correctness of the claim and its legal efficacy. It is enough if he knows of the existence of the claim and of its reasonably possible efficacy. . . . Connecticut courts have consistently held that when a party fails to raise in the trial court the constitutional claim presented on appeal and affirmatively acquiesces to the trial court’s order, that party waives any such claim.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. McDaniel, 104 Conn. App. 627, 633 , 934 A.2d 847 (2007), cert. denied, 285 Conn. 912 , 94”
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.