110 Conn. App. 621 - State v. Bonner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e have consistently employed a two-part analysis in appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a criminal conviction. . . . First, we construe the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict. Second, we determine whether upon the facts so construed and the inferences reasonably drawn therefrom the jury reasonably could have concluded that the cumulative force of the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. . . . That the evidence is circumstantial rather than direct does not diminish the probative force of that evidence.. . . We must be mindful, however, that [a]lthough the jury may draw reasonable, logical inferences from the facts proven, [it] may not resort to speculation and conjecture.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 194 - State v. Balbuena · 126 Conn. App. 52 - State v. Taylor

2. “The standard of appellate review of a denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal has been settled by judicial decision.. . . The issue to be determined is whether the jury could have reasonably concluded, from the facts established and the reasonable inferences which could be drawn from those facts, that the cumulative effect was to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. . . .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 194 - State v. Balbuena · 126 Conn. App. 52 - State v. Taylor

3. “[It does not diminish the probative force of the evidence that consists, in whole or in part, of evidence that is circumstantial rather than direct.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Nielsen