108 Conn. App. 336 - State v. Blake’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2025
12 state decisions
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 Green v. United States · Delaware v. New York · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County · Strobel v. Strobel
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘[The Defendant]: I would like to address the court. “ ‘The Court: All right. You should understand that anything you say can be used against you. “ ‘[The Defendant]: Yeah, I understand that. First of all, I need a continuance for ample time to find better representation. I don’t feel my lawyer has my best interest on hand. And, secondly, Your Honor, with all due respect to the court, I want to file an oral motion for you to recuse yourself on the grounds of bias and preju dice. And also I need copies of my transcript from the first day of my probation hearing. “ ‘The Court: All right. Your request for a lawyer is denied. Your request that I recuse myself is denied as having not complied with the proper procedure of the rules. And what was the last one you said? “ ‘[The Defendant]: I also needed a copy of the transcript of the first day of my probation hearing. “ ‘The Court: That will be done for any appeal purposes. If you file an appeal, you’ll get a transcript or your lawyer will get a transcript.’ “The court then invited the defendant’s attorney to address the court with regard to sentencing. After the defendant’s attorney addressed the court concerning that matter, the court stated to the defendant: ‘All right. Now . . . then, do you not want to say anything on your own behalf about sentencing?’ The defendant responded, ‘No.’ The court, noting that the ‘defendant [had] exercised his right not to be heard at sentencing,’ thereafter found that the beneficial aspects of p”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Blake
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.