109 Conn. App. 55 - State v. Pascal’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 state decisions

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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In analyzing claims of prosecutorial impropriety, we engage in a two step analytical process. ... The two steps are separate and distinct. ... We first examine whether prosecutorial impropriety occurred. ... Second, if an impropriety exists, we then examine whether it deprived the defendant of his due process right to a fair trial. ... If we conclude that prosecutorial impropriety has occurred, we then must determine, by applying the six factors enumerated in [ State v. Williams , 204 Conn. 523 , 540, 529 A.2d 653 (1987) ], whether the entire trial was so infected with unfairness so as to deprive the defendant of his due process right to a fair trial. ... These factors include the extent to which the impropriety was invited by defense conduct, the severity of the impropriety, the frequency of the impropriety, the centrality of the impropriety to the critical issues in the case, the effectiveness of the curative measures adopted and the strength of the state's case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 169 Conn. App. 1 - State v. Holmes