171 Conn. App. 702 - State v. Martinez’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. “Relevant evidence is evidence that has a logical tendency to aid the trier in the determination of an issue .... One fact is relevant to another if in the common course of events the existence of one, alone or with other facts, renders the existence of the other either more certain or more probable .... Evidence is irrelevant or too remote if there is such a want of open and visible connection between the evidentiary and principal facts that, all things considered, the former is not worthy or safe to be admitted in the proof of the latter .... The trial court has wide discretion to determine the relevancy of evidence and [e]very reasonable presumption should be made in favor of the correctness of the court's ruling in determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion .... [A]buse of discretion exists when a court could have chosen different alternatives but has decided the matter so arbitrarily as to vitiate logic, or has decided it based on improper or irrelevant factors.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 175 Conn. App. 838 - State v. Halili

2. “The right to cross-examine a witness concerning specific acts of misconduct is limited in three distinct ways. First, cross-examination may only extend to specific acts of misconduct other than a felony conviction if those acts bear a special significance upon the [issue] of veracity .... Second, [w]hether to permit cross-examination as to particular acts of misconduct ... lies largely within the discretion of the trial court.... Third, extrinsic evidence of such acts is inadmissible.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 187 Conn. App. 813 - State v. Rivera

3. “if testimony of a witness is to remain in the case as a basis for conviction, the defendant must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to reveal any infirmities that cast doubt on the reliability of that testimony”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 188 Conn. App. 481 - State v. Hutton