151 Misc. 2d 32 - People v. Colban’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 1998
most recently cited
2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . . was the prosecutor's reference unsolicited or was it made in response to a juror query or some compelling circumstance? What was the nature and extent of the reference? What was the context in which it was made? Was it followed by a prompt curative . . . instruction? In addition, since prejudice to the defendant cannot always be measured with pinpoint accuracy, the Court should also consider whether the evidence before the grand jury was overwhelming or just barely sufficient.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.