135 Conn. App. 635 - State v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[have] any incentive to testify favorably for the state.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 183 Conn. App. 496 - Gaskin v. Commissioner of Correction · Greene v. Comm'r of Corr.

2. “To prove that a defendant is guilty of robbery, the state must prove that the defendant had the specific intent to commit a larceny and that the larceny was committed through the use or threatened use of force.... [T]he intent element of robbery relates to the commission of the larceny and not to the use or threatened use of physical force.... Additionally, the specific intent required to prove an attempted robbery is no different from the specific intent required to commit a robbery, as [i]t is plain from a reading of General Statutes § 53a-49(a) that the intent required for attempt liability is the intent required for the commission of the substantive crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 173 Conn. App. 119 - State v. Henderson

3. “jurors could well have been left with the impression ... that [he did not have] any incentive to testify favorably for the state.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Greene v. Comm'r of Corr.